### Author Topic: Astronomicalgate - Is that a Fact or Faction?  (Read 55279 times)

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Astronomicalgate - Is that a Fact or Faction?
« on: July 13, 2009, 20:28:05 »
Is that a Fact? Or is it a MUST theoretical Fact?

Scientits state a lot of theories and mathematical models as facts. But these ideas and models are all based on other theories and models.

When something is discovered or announced and they mention that it totally changes or is very different to what was expected then we have to study what happened before. Was there any statements or experiments that we were told confirmed or proved the original now discredited theory? What information/theories was the now discredted idea based upon? How did those experiments or data prove something that is not correct?  Was it a Fact or was it a Faction, a group of astronomers/scientits either ignoring certain data or only selecting results that fit? Humans are prone to do that and perhaps the worst to do that are people who are figthing the establishment and mainstream ideas. Such as the Electric Universe Theory.

As soon as Scientists and Geologist use the word MUST you know that the theory or explanation is in trouble as the fact of what you actually see does not relate to what is found. But it MUST  be true or the original idea (updated for the nth time) would not be correct. As predicted (just now).

Remember when Black Holes use to be...Black Holes? The only thing they don't seem to do now is suck anything in or be black. In theory they do but all the actual physical evidence shows everything being emitted away from them.

Quote
Black hole spews water vapour

"This backs up our prediction that the water is found in the jet from the supermassive black hole, rather than the rotating disc of gas that surrounds it."
BBC news

List of "Facts" or "must facts"

2010 posts

** dark energy and matter - may not exist say scientists?

** The Standard Model -  Higgs boson variations?

** New Model Army - Scientists completely astonished it worked

** Enceladus - A model of Fact or Faction!

** Why Won't the Supernova Explode? - NASA article on problems with the supernova model/theory not working on supercomputers (the theory is not wrong though)

** Lightning, Sticky Tape, and Black Hole Observations - stunning explanation for Black Holes in an Electric Universe

** Dark God? - can not be measured or seen but has to be there for the universe to make sense/work?

** Black Holes -  when is a Black Hole not a Black Hole?

** Black Holes - you can have any colour you like as long as its not black

** Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs) - model does not match what/where they find GRBs

** GRBs - the morphology of W49B - English translation of Italian

** The Oort Cloud - Is the Oort cloud hypothetical, fact or hypepathetical?

** Milky Ways field more magnetic than calculated - all mathematical models now wrong?

2009 posts
Asteroid Dust, Zodiacal Clouds or Dusty Plasma - Fact or in theory Fact?

Black Holes - the only thing they DONT do is suck anything in

Titans methane storm clouds and very rock looking rocks

Isostasy = Isofantasy? What is the idea behind India leaving Africa to smash into the Himalayas?

« Last Edit: June 16, 2010, 06:36:12 by electrobleme »

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Asteroid Dust, Zodiacal Clouds or Dusty Plasma - Fact or in theory Fact?
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2009, 22:06:31 »
Zodiacal Dust - fact or in theory?

Tau Ceti

Quote

It is the first star to be found to have a disk of dust and comets around it similar in size and shape to the disk of comets and asteroids that orbits the Sun. But the similarity ends there explains Jane Greaves, Royal Astronomical Society Norman Lockyer Fellow and lead scientist: 'Tau Ceti has more than ten times the number of comets and asteroids that there are in our Solar System. We don't yet know whether there are any planets orbiting Tau Ceti, but if there are, it is likely that they will experience constant bombardment from asteroids of the kind that is believed to have wiped out the dinosaurs. It is likely that with so many large impacts life would not have the opportunity to evolve.'
Joint Astronomy Centre, 2004

Quote
Debris disk

In 2004, a team of UK astronomers led by Jane Greaves discovered that Tau Ceti has more than 10 times the amount of cometary and asteroidal material orbiting it than does our Sun.
Wiki - Tau Ceti

The Wizard of Oz

Quote

Modelling of Tau Ceti's dust disk observations by the astronomers indicate, however, that the mass of the colliding bodies up to 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) in size may total around 1.2 Earth-masses, compared with 0.1 Earth-masses estimated to be in the Solar System's Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt (Greaves et al, 2004). Thus, Tau Ceti's dust disk may have around 10 times more cometary and asteroidal material than is currently found in the Solar System. Why the Tau Ceti System would have a more massive cometary disk than the Solar System is not fully understood. One theory is that Sol may have passed relatively close to another star at some point in its history and that the close encounter stripped off most of its comets and asteroids
solstation.com - Tau Ceti star and Dust disk

Quote

In 2004, a team of UK astronomers led by Jane Greaves discovered that Tau Ceti has more than 10 times the amount of cometary and asteroidal material orbiting it than does our Sun. This was determined by measuring the disk of cold dust orbiting the star produced by collisions between such small bodies...

The debris disk was discovered by measuring the amount of radiation emitted by the system in the far infrared portion of the spectrum. The disk forms a symmetric feature that is centered on the star, and the outer radius averages 55 AU. The lack of infrared radiation from the warmer parts of the disk near Tau Ceti imply an inner cut-off at a radius of 10 AU. By comparison, the Solar System's Kuiper belt extends from 30 to 50 AU. To be maintained over a long period of time, this ring of dust must be constantly replenished through collisions by larger bodies. The bulk of the disk appears to be orbiting Tau Ceti at a distance of 35–50 AU, well outside the orbit of the habitable zone. At this distance, the dust belt may be analogous to the Kuiper belt that lies outside the orbit of Neptune in the solar system.

Tau Ceti shows that stars need not lose large disks as they age and such a thick belt may not be uncommon among Sun-like stars. Tau Ceti's belt is only 1/20th as dense as the belt around its young neighbor, Epsilon Eridani. The relative lack of debris around the Sun may be the unusual case: one research team member suggests the Sun may have passed close to another star early in its history and had most of its comets and asteroids stripped away.
Wiki - Tau Ceti star and its Dusty Plasma Disk

Epsilon Eridani

Quote
Although the pictures taken do not show the icy bodies directly, the dust that is shown is believed to be debris that is forming, or being fragmented from, these bodies...

Yellow to red areas of the image indicate the highest concentrations of cold dust, while blue to black areas suggest very little dust...

The prominent bright peak within the ring -- at the lower left -- may represent a concentration of dust particles trapped in mean-motion resonances by an orbiting planet (Liou and Zook, 1999), or (less likely) the remnants of a major cometary collision. Although there has been as yet no confirmation of a substellar companion around Epsilon Eridani, this image suggests that at least one such object may exist. In any case, it is likely that the tiny dust particles around the star will gradually accumulate into icy bodies like those in the Solar System's E-K Belt.

The ring structure may be a young analog to the E-K Belt of the Solar System, where the central region has been partially cleared by the aggregation of dust grains into planetesimals. There is much less dust in an apparent hole around the star at a distance within the radius of Neptune's orbit, and the peak emissions found at 65 AU lies within a dust disk or ring of between 30 to 105 AUs radius, resulting from colliding bodies of five to nine Earth-masses...
solstation - Epsilon Eridani Zodiac Dust Cloud

Quote
The system also includes two debris belts composed of rocky asteroids, one at about 3 AU and the second at about 20 AU, whose structure may be maintained by a hypothetical second planet. In addition, Epsilon Eridani harbors an extensive outer debris disk corresponding to the Solar System's Kuiper belt. The density of orbiting material, which is considerably more than that around the Sun, corroborates the star's youth.

Dust disk
This emission was interpreted as coming from an analog of the Kuiper Belt in the Solar System; a compact dusty disk structure surrounding the star.

The asymmetrical structure of the dust belt may be explained as the gravitational perturbation by a planet. The clumps in the dust occur at orbits that have an integer resonance with the orbit of the suspected planet. Thus, for example, the region of the disk that completes two orbits for every three orbits of a planet are in 3:2 resonance. With computer simulations, the ring morphology can be reproduced by the capture of dust particles in 5:3 and 3:2 orbital resonances with a planet that has an orbital eccentricity of about 0.3.

The dust disk contains approximately 1,000 times more dust than is present in the inner system around our Sun, which may mean it has about 1,000 times as much cometary material as our solar system.[citation needed] The dust has an estimated mass equal to a sixth of mass of the Moon. This dust is being generated by the collision of comets, which range up to 10 to 30 km in diameter and have a combined mass of 5 to 9 times the mass of the Earth. This is similar to the estimated 10 Earth masses in the Kuiper Belt.

Within 35 AU of the star the dust is depleted, which may mean that the system has formed planets which have cleared out the dust in this region. This is consistent with currently accepted models of the inner solar system, and so there may be terrestrial planets around the star.

On October 27, 2008, NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope revealed observations indicating that Epsilon Eridani actually has two asteroid belts, and a cloud of exozodiacal dust. One belt sits at approximately the same position as the one in our solar system. The second, denser belt, most likely also populated by asteroids, lies between the first belt and the comet ring. The presence of the asteroid belts implies additional planets in the Epsilon Eridani system.
Wikipedia - Epsilon Eridani

Quote
Although the image cannot reveal comets directly, the dust that is revealed is believed to be debris from comets, Greaves said.

Epsilon Eridani's inner region contains about 1,000 times more dust than our Solar System's inner region, which may mean it has about 1,000 times more comets, the astronomers said. Epsilon Eridani is believed to be only 500 million years to 1 billion years old; our Sun is estimated to be 4.5 billion years old, and its inner region is believed to have looked very similar at that age.
Jane Greaves - Joint Astronomy Centre
« Last Edit: July 13, 2009, 22:18:25 by electrobleme »

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Black Holes - the only thing they do NOT do is suck anything in
« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2009, 16:41:57 »
When is a Black Hole not a Black Hole? When it's a Black Hole.

Black holes do not suck anything in. So what are they? And how can they still be called Black Holes?

Quote
Explanation: What happens to matter that falls toward an energetic black hole? In the case of Cygnus X-1, perhaps little of that matter actually makes it in. Infalling gas may first collide not only with itself but with an accretion disk of swirling material surrounding the black hole. The result may be a microquasar that glows across the electromagnetic spectrum and produces powerful jets that expel much of the infalling matter back into the cosmos at near light speed before it can even approach the black hole's event horizon. Confirmation that black hole jets may create expanding shells has come recently from the discovery of shells surrounding Cygnus X-1. Pictured above on the upper right is one such shell quite possibly created by the jet of microquasar and black hole candidate Cygnus X-1.The physical processes that create the black hole jets is a topic that continues to be researched.
Possible Jet Blown Shells Near Microquasar Cygnus X1 - astronet.ru

Quote
However, it is not that jets escape from inside the event horizon. Nothing can escape from an event horizon, by definition! Instead, it is thought that jets originate in the accretion disk that surrounds the event horizon.
Ask an Astrophysicist - Black Hole Jets

Jets with water coming out of a Black Hole
Quote
"We have been observing the water maser every month since the detection and seen a steady signal with no apparent change in the velocity of the water vapour in the data we've obtained so far," said Dr John McKean of the Netherlands Institute for Radio Astronomy.

"This backs up our prediction that the water is found in the jet from the supermassive black hole, rather than the rotating disc of gas that surrounds it." European Week of Astronomy and Space Science meeting

« Last Edit: August 05, 2009, 17:53:58 by electrobleme »

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Titans methane storm clouds and very rock looking rocks
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2009, 06:12:15 »
Titan has clouds and rocks like Earth and Mars

Quote
A tropical storm was not what astronomers expected to see when they pointed their telescopes toward the equator of Saturn's moon Titan last summer...
Clouds of vaporized methane are not uncommon on Titan, though they have never before been observed in Titan's tropics....
"The models predicted that the equatorial region should be very dry and should not support cloud formation," said astronomer Henry Roe of Lowell Observatory in Arizona.
aol news - Storm Clouds Found on Saturn's Moon

Quote
"It's really surprising how closely Titan's surface resembles Earth's," noted Rosaly Lopes, a planetary scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., at a recent meeting of the International Astronomical Union in Brazil. "Titan looks more like the Earth than any other body in the solar system, despite the huge differences in temperature and other environmental conditions."
abc news - Scientists Spot Massive Methane Rainstorm on Saturn's Moon

DIScussion on Titans weather and rocks Will more and more features be found similar to Earth and Mars?

News, press releases and video - Titans Tropical Storm Clouds and Methane/Ethane weather system

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Isostasy (geology) - quoted as fact in reports and proven idea? Isofantasy
« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2009, 14:47:08 »
Ever wondered why India broke away from Africa and then collided with the Himalayas?

India colliding with the Himalayas is its own proven idea yeah? It would not be made up because the evidence supports it yeah?

Quote
Isostasy (Greek isos = "equal", stásis = "standstill") is a term used in geology to refer to the state of gravitational equilibrium between the earth's lithosphere and asthenosphere such that the tectonic plates "float" at an elevation which depends on their thickness and density. This concept is invoked to explain how different topographic heights can exist at the Earth's surface. When a certain area of lithosphere reaches the state of isostasy, it is said to be in isostatic equilibrium. Isostasy is not a process that upsets equilibrium, but rather one which restores it (a negative feedback). It is generally accepted that the earth is a dynamic system that responds to loads in many different ways, however isostasy provides an important 'view' of the processes that are actually happening. Nevertheless, certain areas (such as the Himalayas) are not in isostatic equilibrium, which has forced researchers to identify other reasons to explain their topographic heights (in the case of the Himalayas, by proposing that their elevation is being "propped-up" by the force of the impacting Indian plate).
Wikipedia - Isostasy

Which is why the factual idea that India left Africa by breaking away and going on walkabouts occured. Then the idea of India somehow ploughing through the earths crust all that way means that another idea has been born and then that means...

It's all a fairytale built upon a day dream proven by an physically unprovable mathematical wet dream but maths rule the world and the universe.  Commons sense and logic from what you can actually see and measure not only has nothing to do with it but is ignored or is the actual anomaly.

If you don't think so then just take 1 minute to actually think about the Big Bang. EVERYTHING in the whole universe concentrated down to a single point? And all our "space science" is based upon that single idea.  Why is there such a massive gap of "nothingness" during the start of the Big Bang?

The proof for a made up idea is another made up idea based on that made up idea with facts from a made up idea supporting other made up ideas. Quoted as fact without question in reports but when you look into it...

Growing or Expanding Earth?

If the idea of Isostasy is made up or not correct then other wonderful things like post glacial rebound may not exist. The earth may just be increasing or decreasing in height or mass due to other reasons. Could it be a growing or expanding Earth?  If the Earths surfaces do move higher or lower then any idea or theory that may be able to explain it has to be considered, Especially as Plate Tectonics, Isostasy, post glacial rebound etc are still theories even if they are quoted as fact.

Growing Earth Theory / Expanding Earth Theory

If minerals, chemicals and water are created by a plasma or electrical discharge then could this be where the Earths material can come from?

« Last Edit: September 08, 2009, 18:46:54 by electrobleme »

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Earths layers and melting
« Reply #5 on: September 08, 2009, 17:22:41 »
How the layers of the earth were formed

Quote
The heat buildup inside earth reached a maxim early in the Earth's history and has declined significantly since. The greater heat content of the early Earth was the product of (1) a greater abundance of radioactive elements, (2) a greater number of impacts, and (3) the early gravitational crowding. The initial accretion of particles resulted in a rather homogeneous sphere composed of a loose amalgam of metallic fragments (iron meteorites), rocky fragments (stony meteorites), and icy fragments (comets). However, the increased heat content of the early Earth resulted in melting of the Earth's interior, so that the young planet became density stratified with the heavier (metallic) materials sinking to the center of the earth, and the lighter (rocky) materials floating upward toward the surface of the earth. The very lightest volatile materials (derived from comets) were easily melted or vaporized, rising beyond the earth's rocky surface to form the early oceans and the atmosphere. We now have a differentiated earth due to melting and mobilization of materials driven by the earth's internal heat engine. This has resulted in the development of a series of concentric layers that are both density and compositionally stratified. This demonstrated in the diagram below, courtesy of the USGS.

Earth Structure

These layers include (1) the dense inner core composed largely of solid Fe and subordinate Ni, with radius of about 1200 km, (2) the molten outer core composed largely of liquid Fe, with subordinate sulfur, with a radius of about 2250 km, (3) the mantle, composed of relatively dense rocky materials, with radius of about 2800 km thick, and (4) the crust which comprises the thin relatively light outer skin of the earth, is divisible into two types: the oceanic crust (~7 km thick) and the continental crust (about 35 km thick). Whereas oceanic crust is composed of basaltic rock, the less dense continental crust is composed of a great variety of rock types having an overall average composition akin to granite.

Within the mantle exists the asthenosphere (Grk. asthenos = weak), between about 100 km and 350 km, which is a special zone composed of hot, weak material that is capable of gradual flow. The layer above the asthenosphere is the lithosphere (Grk. lithos = rock), the rigid and relatively cool outer layer of the earth, composed of both crust and a portion of the upper mantle.

Lying above the lithosphere is (1) the liquid hydrosphere, comprising 71% of the Earth's surface, and (2) that the still lighter gaseous atmosphere, both of which were ultimately derived from the accretion of comets. The occurrence of these volatile components along the outermost portion of the Earth is a product of volcanic outgassing during the differentiation event.

MELTING AND COMPOSITIONAL DIFFERENTIATION OF THE EARLY EARTH - geology.sdsu .edu

« Last Edit: September 08, 2009, 18:51:09 by electrobleme »

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### The Oort Cloud - hypothetical or hypepathetical?
« Reply #6 on: January 09, 2010, 21:36:13 »
The Oort Cloud - fact or fiction

The Oort Cloud - you will keep reading about this amazing astronomy feature. It is normally stated and written as an absolutely proven fact. There is the odd time that an article on the the Oort Cloud will mention it is hypothetical they then go on to describe the most amazing things about it. Then other ideas/theories/models/careers/reputations/funding/missions are based on this hypothetical model.

Is the Oort Cloud hypothetical or hype pothetical or is it fact?

Quote
The Oort cloud is an immense spherical cloud surrounding the planetary system and extending approximately 3 light years, about 30 trillion kilometers from the Sun. This vast distance is considered the edge of the Sun's orb of physical, gravitational, or dynamical influence.

Within the cloud, comets are typically tens of millions of kilometers apart. They are weakly bound to the sun, and passing stars and other forces can readily change their orbits, sending them into the inner solar system or out to interstellar space. This is especially true of comets on the outer edges of the Oort cloud. The structure of the cloud is believed to consist of a relatively dense core that lies near the ecliptic plane and gradually replenishes the outer boundaries, creating a steady state. One sixth of an estimated six trillion icy objects or comets are in the outer region with the remainder in the relatively dense core.

In addition to stellar perturbations where another star's Oort cloud passes through or close to the Sun's Oort cloud, are the influences of giant molecular clouds and tidal forces. A giant molecular-cloud is by far more massive than the Sun. It is an accumulation of cold hydrogen that is the birthplace of stars and solar systems. These are infrequently encountered, about every 300-500 million years, but when they are encountered, they can violently redistribute comets within the Oort cloud.

Tidal forces affecting the Oort cloud come from stars in the Milky Way's galactic disk with some pull from the galactic core. The tide results from the sun and comets being different distances from these massive amounts of matter. The force on the comets from these tides is greater than the perturbations of passing stars, and comets beyond 200,000 AU are easily lost to interstellar space. This pull contributes to the steady state which replenishes the outer comets that are randomly distributed away from the ecliptic plane.

The total mass of comets in the Oort cloud is estimated to be 40 times that of Earth. This matter is believed to have originated at different distances and therefore temperatures from the sun, which explains the compositional diversity observed in comets.

Typical noontime temperatures are four degrees Celsius above absolute zero. As temperatures move toward absolute zero, the kinetic energy of the molecules approach a finite value. Absolute zero should not be considered a state of zero energy without motion. There still remains some molecular energy, although it is at a minimum, at absolute zero.

The Oort cloud is the source of long-period comets and possibly higher-inclination intermediate comets that were pulled into shorter period orbits by the planets, such as Halley and Swift-Tuttle. Comets can also shift their orbits due to jets of gas and dust that rocket from their icy surface as they approach the sun. Although they get off course, comets do have initial orbits with widely different ranges, from 200 years to once every million years or more. Comets entering the planetary region for the first time, come from an average distance of 44,000 astronomical units.

Long period comets can appear at any time and come from any direction. Bright comets can usually be seen every 5-10 years. Two recent Oort cloud comets were Hyakutake and Hale-Bopp. Hyakutake was average in size, but came to 0.10 AU (15,000,000 km) from Earth, which made it appear especially spectacular. Hale-Bopp, on the other hand, was an unusually large and dynamic comet, ten times that of Halley at comparable distances from the sun, making it appear quite bright, even though it did not approach closer than 1.32 AU (197,000,000 km) to the Earth.

Recognition of the Oort cloud gave explanation to the age old questions: "What are comets, and where do they come from?" In 1950, Jan H. Oort inferred the existence of the Oort cloud from the physical evidence of long-period comets entering the planetary system. This Dutch astronomer, who determined the rotation of the Milky Way galaxy in the 1920's, interpreted comet orbital distribution with only 19 well-measured orbits to study and successfully recognized where these comets came from. Additional gathered data has since confirmed his studies, establishing and expanding our knowledge of the Oort cloud.
The Oort Cloud - solarviews .com

« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 22:10:16 by electrobleme »

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Milky Ways field more magnetic than calculated - mathematical modesl now wrong?
« Reply #7 on: January 09, 2010, 21:59:34 »

Milky Way magnetic field much stronger than calculated....

The models based on the mathematical models are wrong as the original maths are perhaps wrong. So the other theories and hypothetical ideas based on it are wrong and those based on that are wrong and ...so what about all the proof, data and experiments that proved that these models were correct? Do they now not prove it or where they wrong or do we have instead of a Climategate an Astronomicalgate?

Quote
An international research project involving the University of Adelaide has revealed that the magnetic field in the centre of the Milky Way is at least 10 times stronger than the rest of the Galaxy.

The evidence is significant because it gives astronomers a lower limit on the magnetic field, an important factor in calculating a whole range of astronomical data.

Researchers from the Max-Planck-Institute for Nuclear Physics, the University of Adelaide, Monash University and the United States have published their findings in Nature this week.

Dr Roland Crocker, the lead author, and Dr David Jones both worked on the project while based at Monash University and the University of Adelaide’s School of Chemistry and Physics. The two physicists are now based at the Max-Planck-Institute for Nuclear Physics in Heidelberg, Germany.

“This research will challenge current thinking among astronomers,” Dr Crocker says. “For the last 30 years there has been considerable uncertainty of the exact value of the magnetic field in the centre of the Milky Way. The strength of this field enters into most calculations in astronomy, since almost all of space is magnetised,” he says.

Dr Jones says the findings will affect diverse fields, from star formation theory to cosmology.

“If our Galactic centre’s magnetic field is stronger than we thought, this raises additional questions of how it got so strong when fields in the early universe are, in contrast, quite weak. We know now that more than 10% of the Galaxy’s magnetic energy is concentrated in less than 0.1% of its volume, right at its centre,” he says.

Dr Jones completed his PhD at Adelaide, studying the Galactic Centre magnetic field under the supervision of Dr Raymond Protheroe, Associate Professor of Physics at the University of Adelaide, and Dr Crocker, a former postdoctoral researcher at the University.

“The Milky Way just glows in radio waves and in gamma-rays produced by collisions of energetic particles, and is brightest near its centre. Knowing the magnetic field there helps us understand the source of the radio and gamma-rays better,” says Dr Protheroe.
Scientists reveal Milky Way's magnetic attraction - physorg .com

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs) model does not match what/where they find GRBs
« Reply #8 on: January 10, 2010, 02:15:25 »
gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) model incorrect with actual real life evidence

W49B "supernova remnant" Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs)

The model for Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs) does not fit what we can see and observe in the Universe. GRBs to work in a Gracity Universe require dense clouds of gas/dust but we find GRBs in an empty area of space. But don't worry although the facts do not match the evidence of the Universe the new evidence from W49B will make it so a new model will meet the Faction that we find. So what about all the models and evidence that confirmed the previous theory?

"The observations of W49B may help to resolve a problem that has bedeviled the collapsar model for gamma-ray bursts. On the one hand, the model is based on the collapse of a massive star, which is normally formed from a dense cloud. On the other hand, observations of the afterglow of many gamma-ray bursts indicate that the explosion occurred in a low-density gas. "

Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs) and W49B have other "strange" features not easily explained by the gravityVerse. Infact one of these logically unexplainable features makes them a GRB. This is 2 massive energetic plasma jets in opposite directions. Another feature is the material/minerals found around or from GRBs/ "supernovas" that the event or process that creates whatever is happening, that we call a supernova, produces.

Quote
Combined data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and infrared observations with the Palomar 200-inch telescope have uncovered evidence that a gamma-ray burst, one of nature's most catastrophic explosions, occurred in our Galaxy a few thousand years ago. The supernova remnant, W49B, may also be the first remnant of a gamma-ray burst discovered in the Milky Way.

W49B is a barrel-shaped nebula located about 35,000 light years from Earth. The new data reveal bright infrared rings, like hoops around a barrel, and intense X-radiation from iron and nickel along the axis of the barrel.

"These results provide intriguing evidence that an extremely massive star exploded in two powerful, oppositely directed jets that were rich in iron," said Jonathan Keohane of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory at a press conference at the American Astronomical Society meeting in Denver. "This makes W49B a prime candidate for being the remnant of a gamma ray burst involving a black hole collapsar."

"The nearest known gamma-ray burst to Earth is several million light years away - most are billions of light years distant - so the detection of the remnant of one in our galaxy would be a major breakthrough," said William Reach, one of Keohane's collaborators from the California Institute of Technology.

According to the collapsar theory, gamma-ray bursts are produced when a massive star runs out of nuclear fuel and the star's core collapses to form a black hole surrounded by a disk of extremely hot, rapidly rotating, magnetized gas. Much of this gas is pulled into the black hole, but some is flung away in oppositely directed jets of gas traveling at near the speed of light.

An observer aligned with one these jets would see a gamma-ray burst, a blinding flash in which the concentrated power equals that of ten quadrillion Suns for a minute or so. The view perpendicular to the jets is a less astonishing, although nonetheless spectacular supernova explosion. For W49B, the jet is tilted out of the plane of the sky by about 20 degrees.

Four rings about 25 light years in diameter can be identified in the infrared image. These rings, which are due to warm gas, were presumably flung out by the rapid rotation of the massive star a few hundred thousand years before the star exploded. The rings were pushed outward by a hot wind from the star a few thousand years before it exploded.

Chandra's image and spectral data show that the jets of multimillion-degree-Celsius gas extending along the axis of the barrel are rich in iron and nickel ions, consistent with their being ejected from the center of the star. This distinguishes the explosion from a conventional type II supernova in which most of the Fe and Ni goes into making the neutron star, and the outer part of the star is what is flung out. In contrast, in the collapsar model of gamma ray bursts iron and nickel from the center is ejected along the jet.

At the ends of the barrel, the X-ray emission flares out to make a hot cap. The X-ray cap is surrounded by a flattened cloud of hydrogen molecules detected in the infrared. These features indicate that the shock wave produced by the explosion has encountered a large, dense cloud of gas and dust.

The scenario that emerges is one in which a massive star formed from a dense cloud of dust, shone brightly for a few million years while spinning off rings of gas and pushing them away, forming a nearly empty cavity around the star. The star then underwent a collapsar-type supernova explosion that resulted in a gamma-ray burst.

The observations of W49B may help to resolve a problem that has bedeviled the collapsar model for gamma-ray bursts. On the one hand, the model is based on the collapse of a massive star, which is normally formed from a dense cloud. On the other hand, observations of the afterglow of many gamma-ray bursts indicate that the explosion occurred in a low-density gas. Based on the W49B data, the resolution proposed by Keohane and colleagues is that the star had carved out an extensive low-density cavity in which the explosion subsequently occurred.

"This star appears to have exploded inside a bubble it had created," said Keohane. "In a sense, it dug its own grave."
NASA Chandra Observation of Supernova W49B Supernova Points to Ancient Gamma Ray Burst - spaceref .com

Smoking Gun Found for Gamma-Ray Burst in Milky Way

Another thing about  Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs) is the amount of energy that they are said to produce.  Gamma-Ray Bursts, in theory, create the greatest amount of energy we have ever seen. In theory. This is based on our calculations of their distance. Another theory based on the theory of Red Shift.

"An observer aligned with one these jets would have seen a gamma-ray burst, a blinding flash in which the concentrated power equals that of ten quadrillion Suns for a minute or so."

According to astronomers Red Shift theory GRBs are immense distances away, billions of light years. So the energy we see from these bursts is multiplied by a lot and you get an incredible number. If the theory of Red Shift is not correct then these GRBs are much closer and the amount of energy they produce is more "normal".

Quote
A composite Chandra X-ray (blue) and Palomar infrared (red and green) image of the supernova remnant W49B reveals a barrel-shaped nebula consisting of bright infrared rings around a glowing bar of intense X-radiation along the axis.The X-rays in the bar are produced by 15 million degree Celsius gas that is rich in iron and nickel ions. At the ends of the barrel, the X-ray emission flares out to make a hot cap. The X-ray cap is surrounded by a flattened cloud of hydrogen molecules detected in the infrared. These features indicate that jets of hot gas produced in the supernova have encountered a large, dense cloud of gas and dust.

The following sequence of events has been suggested to account for the X-ray and infrared data: A massive star formed from a dense cloud of dust and gas, shone brightly for a few million years while spinning off rings of gas and pushing them away to form a nearly empty cavity around the star. The star then exhausted its nuclear fuel and its core collapsed to form a black hole. Much of the gas around the black hole was pulled into it, but some, including material rich in iron and nickel was flung away in oppositely directed jets of gas traveling near the speed of light. When the jet hit the dense cloud surrounding the star, it flared out and drove a shock wave into the cloud.

An observer aligned with one these jets would have seen a gamma-ray burst, a blinding flash in which the concentrated power equals that of ten quadrillion Suns for a minute or so. The view perpendicular to the jets would be a less astonishing, although nonetheless spectacular supernova explosion. For W49B, the jet is tilted out of the plane of the sky by about 20 degrees, but the remains of the jet are visible as a hot X-ray emitting bar of gas.

W49B is about 35 thousand light years away, whereas the nearest known gamma-ray burst to Earth is several million light years away - most are billions of light years distant. If confirmed, the discovery of a relatively nearby remnant of a gamma-ray burst would give scientists an excellent opportunity to study the aftermath of one of nature's most violent explosions.
Smoking Gun Found for Gamma-Ray Burst in Milky Way

** Silicon, sulfur and iron atoms from W49B - stripped of electrons requires temps of 17-30 MILLION Centigrade (in a Gravity Universe)
« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 04:26:03 by electrobleme »

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### GRBs - the morphology of W49B - English translation of Italian
« Reply #9 on: January 10, 2010, 03:39:27 »
the  morphology of W49B - Italian

immagine nei raggi X ottenuta col Satellite Chandra supernova W49B

The article this is from is in Italian, I have used google translate to convert it, where you see the funny signs it is mathematical stuff. It investigates the morphology of W49B and its associated features,

"In conclusion, our analysis showed that the association of W49B with a gamma-ray burst is not supported by clear observational evidence, but there are clear indications of aspherical explosion."

Quote
Explosive nucleosynthesis and stellar explosions. The rest W49B

The study of supernova remnants can obtain information on the mechanisms of supernova explosions and the processes of explosive nucleosynthesis. The supernova remnant W49B is dominated SNR ejecta where the shock wave, impact against a very extensive and dense cloud generated a shock reflects extremely hot. This shock,'' bouncing back toward the center of the supernova remnant, is heating the stellar material ejected by supernova (ejecta) (see

In the context of a collaboration with DSM / DAPNIA / Service d'Astrophysique of CEA Saclay has been that we analyzed X-ray observation of W49B obtained with XMM-Newton satellite. The analysis allowed to study the spatial distribution of chemical and physical properties of the ejecta  in this supernova remnant and to obtain important information on the dynamics of the explosion. The spatially resolved spectral analysis results show that W49B is a clear anisotropy of the ejecta in terms of temperature and chemical composition (see Figure 56). In every region of W49B, however, the abundances of Si, S, Ca, Ar, Mg and Fe are sovrasolari and this confirms that we are seeing elements synthesized during the life of the progenitor star and stages of his death (through the phenomenon of explosive nucleosynthesis).

We now try to understand whether the complex morphology of W49B has been determined by the dynamics of the explosion itself and / or its interaction with the surrounding medium. As shown in Figure 55, at 2:12 micron infrared observations have shown the prsenza of a large molecular cloud that borders the supernova remnant on the eastern front. Also can be seen in Figure filaments characterized by IR emission line at $1.64 \ mu m$ of [Fe II] which show a ring coaxial arranged around the central bar of W49B. These rings have been interpreted as remnants of an intense stellar wind.

It seems evident that the morphology of the eastern region of W49B has been determined by the presence of the cloud. In particular the east (almost perpendicular to the central bar) is probably due to the interaction of the ejecta with the walls of the molecular cloud, being significantly more dense (molecular clouds reach density values are also at $10 ^ (4)$ cm $^ (-3)$) acts almost as a  wall''by preventing the expansion of the ejecta  (3-4 orders of magnitude less dense) in the eastern direction.

Regarding the central bar, however, there are interstellar structures that may have somehow forced the ejecta to take such a clear axial symmetry. The morphology of the elongated central structure $b$ W49B led to believe a remnant of gamma-ray burst (GRB). 4. Note however that the presence of such a structure does not necessarily reflect aspherical explosion. An alternative explanation could be that the interstellar medium is a kind of ring (placed on the plane containing the line of sight) around W49B: the ejecta were therefore expelled in accordance with a spherical symmetry, but only those who have impacted the ring been heated by the shock reflection generated by the impact. Thus only a small percentage of the expelled half may reach temperatures which produce X-ray emission and the assumption of observing the system along the plane containing the ring, we would receive in a projection elongated morphology like that of the central region. However, it should be noted that according to our estimates of plasma density, the total mass of ejcta observed in all regions of the spectrum is $\ sim$ 8 M $_ (\ odot)$. Therefore, if suppose we observe only a small fraction of the ejecta (the one that has interacted with the molecular cloud), we obtain the excessively high values of total mass ejected. Masses of ejecta far superior to 8 M $_ (\ odot)$ are unrealistic, given that: i) the most massive stars ever observed have masses of  100 M $_ (\ odot)$, ii) before exploding as supernovae they lose significant fractions of their mass as wind, iii) not all the material the star is ejected in the explosion as the nucleus of some solar masses, gravitational collapse forming a neutron star or a black hole.

Another possibility is that the central bar $b$ is in fact associated with aspherical explosion and then to a bipolar jet. The similarity in the values of abundance in the region to the east, $a$, and $b$ suggests that $a$ is the head of the eastern jet. The scenario that emerges is that this jet has been distorted and deviated downward from the impact with the cloud of H $_ (2)$. Note that, assuming aspherical explosion and bipolar, you must consider an anisotropic jet where the eastern arm is significantly longer, warmer and richer in Fe than the West. Note however that the presence of aspherical explosion does not necessarily produce a GRB, which is also required for the release of $\ sim10 ^ (52)$ erg of energy, or un'hypernova.

To test the possibility that W49B is a remnant of GRBs, we compared the abundances found in the bar $a$ with the predictions of numerical models of explosive nucleosynthesis in bipolar supernova explosions aspherical and developed by Maeda and Nomoto 2003. In particular, we compared the expected values and those observed $(X / X_ (\ odot)) / (Fe / Fe_ (\ odot))$, with $X = Si$, $S$, $Ar$, $Ca$ $Cr$, $M$ and $Ni$. Neither model accurately reproduces the observed abundances. Models Hypernova mass (the origin of the main sequence) of the progenitor star Zams $M_ (40) = \ rm M_ (\ odot)$ and energy $E> 10 ^ (52)$ erg are most at variance with observed values (with the largest discrepancies observed for Si, S and Ar), while we got much better results with less energy models such as those with $E = 6.7 \ times 10 ^ (51)$ erg Zams and $M_ (25) = \ rm M_ (\ odot)$ (model 25A) and $E = 0.6 \ times 10 ^ (51)$ erg Zams and $M_ (25) = \ rm M_ (\ odot)$ (25b). We found a fairly good agreement with a model of spherical explosion, the one with $E = 1 \ times 10 ^ (51)$ erg Zams and $M_ (25) = \ rm M_ (\ odot)$ (25Sa). The values predicted by these models and our observational results are compared in Fig 57.

In conclusion, our analysis showed that the association of W49B with a $\ gamma$-ray burst is not supported by clear observational evidence, but there are clear indications of aspherical explosion.
Explosive nucleosynthesis and stellar explosions. The rest W49B - astropa.inaf .it

** Electron stripped silicon, sulfur and iron atoms from W49B - theory predicts that for this to occur you need temps of 17-30 MILLION Centigrade (in a gravityVerse)

Quote
Esplosioni stellari e nucleosintesi esplosiva. Il resto W49B

Lo studio dei resti di supernova consente di ottenere informazioni sui meccanismi di esplosione delle supernovae e sui processi di nucleosintesi esplosiva. Il resto di supernova W49B è un ejecta dominated SNR in cui l'onda d'urto, impattando contro una nube molto estesa e densa ha generato uno shock riflesso estremamente caldo. Tale shock, rimbalzando'' indietro verso il centro del resto di supernova, sta riscaldando il materiale stellare espulso dalla supernova (ejecta) (si veda Fig.55).

Nel contesto di una collaborazione col DSM/DAPNIA/Service d'Astrophysique del CEA di Saclay è stata da noi analizzata un'osservazione nei raggi X di W49B ottenuta col satellite XMM-Newton. L'analisi ha consentito di studiare la distribuzione spaziale delle proprietà chimiche e fisiche degli $ejecta$ in questo resto di supernova e di ottenere importanti informazione sulla dinamica dell'esplosione. I risultati dell'analisi spettrale spazialmente risolta mostrano che in W49B è presente una chiara anisotropia degli ejecta in termini di temperatura e di composizione chimica (si veda la Fig. 56). In ogni regione di W49B, tuttavia, le abbondanze di Si, S, Ca, Ar, Mg e Fe sono sovrasolari e ciò conferma che stiamo osservando elementi sintetizzati nel corso della vita della stella progenitrice e nelle fasi della sua morte (attraverso i fenomeni di nucleosintesi esplosiva).

Cerchiamo adesso di capire se la complessa morfologia di W49B sia stata determinata dalla dinamica stessa dell'esplosione e/o dalla sua interazione col mezzo circostante. Come mostrato in Fig. 55, osservazioni infrarosse a 2.12 micron hanno mostrato la prsenza di una grossa nube molecolare che confina il resto di supernova sul fronte orientale. In Figura si notano inoltre filamenti caratterizzati da emissione IR nella riga ad 1.64 $\mu m$ del [Fe II] che mostrano una struttura ad anelli coassiali disposti intorno alla barra centrale di W49B. Questi anelli sono stati interpretati come residui di un intenso vento stellare.

Appare evidente come la morfologia della regione orientale di W49B sia stata determinata dalla presenza della nube. In particolare la struttura ad Est (pressoché perpendicolare alla barra centrale) è probabilmente dovuta all'interazione degli ejecta con le pareti della nube molecolare che, essendo estremamente più densa (le nubi molecolari raggiungono valori di densità pari anche a $10^{4}$ cm$^{-3}$) agisce quasi come un muro'' impedendo l'espansione degli $ejecta$ (3-4 ordini di grandezza meno densi) nella direzione orientale.

Per quanto riguarda la barra centrale, tuttavia, non ci sono strutture interstellari che possano avere in qualche modo costretto gli ejecta ad assumere una così netta simmetria assiale. La morfologia allungata della struttura centrale $b$ ha spinto a ritenere W49B un resto di gamma-ray burst (GRB). 4. Si noti tuttavia che la presenza di una struttura del genere non necessariamente riflette un'esplosione asferica. Una spiegazione alternativa potrebbe essere che il mezzo interstellare costituisce una sorta di anello (disposto sul piano che contiene la linea di vista) intorno a W49B: gli ejecta sono pertanto stati espulsi secondo una simmetria sferica, ma solo quelli che hanno impattato contro l'anello sono stati riscaldati dallo shock riflesso generato dall'impatto. In questo modo solo una piccola percentuale del mezzo espulso può raggiungere temperature tali da produrre emissione X e, supponendo di osservare il sistema lungo il piano che contiene l'anello, si otterrebbe in proiezione una morfologia allungata come quella della regione centrale. Tuttavia, va notato che, secondo le nostre stime di densità del plasma, la massa totale osservata degli ejcta in tutte le regioni spettrali risulta di $\sim 8$ M$_{\odot}$. Pertanto, se supponiamo di osservare soltanto una piccola frazione degli ejecta (quella che ha interagito con la nube molecolare), otteniamo dei valori eccessivamente alti di massa totale espulsa. Masse di ejecta molto superiori ad 8 M$_{\odot}$ risultano irrealistiche, dal momento che: i) le stelle più massicce mai osservate hanno masse di $100$ M$_{\odot}$; ii) prima di esplodere come supernovae queste perdono considerevoli frazioni della loro massa sotto forma di vento; iii) non tutto il materiale della stella viene espulso nell'esplosione dato che il nucleo, di alcune masse solari, collassa gravitazionalmente formando una stella di neutroni od un buco nero.

Un'altra possibilità è che la barra centrale $b$ sia in effetti associata ad un'esplosione asferica e quindi ad un getto bipolare. La similitudine nei valori di abbondanze nella regione ad est, $a$, ed in $b$ suggerisce inoltre che $a$ sia la testa del getto orientale. Lo scenario che emerge è che questo getto sia stato distorto e deviato verso il basso dall'impatto con la nube di H$_{2}$. Si noti che, assumendo un'esplosione asferica e bipolare, dovremmo necessariamente considerare un getto anisotropo in cui il braccio orientale è significativamente più lungo, più caldo e più ricco di Fe di quello occidentale. Si noti tuttavia che la presenza di un'esplosione asferica non implica necessariamente la produzione di un GRB, per il quale è necessaria anche la liberazione di $\sim10^{52}$ erg di energia, ovvero un'hypernova.

Per verificare la possibilità che W49B sia un resto di GRB, abbiamo confrontato le abbondanze trovate nella barra $a$ con le previsioni dei modelli numerici di nucleosintesi esplosiva in esplosioni asferiche e bipolari di supernova elaborati da Maeda e Nomoto 2003. In particolare, abbiamo confrontato i valori attesi e quelli osservati $(X/X_{\odot})/(Fe/Fe_{\odot})$, con $X=Si$, $S$, $Ar$, $Ca$, $Cr$, $Mn$ e $Ni$ . Nessuno dei modelli riproduce esattamente le abbondanze osservate. I modelli di hypernova con massa (all'origine della sequenza principale) della stella progenitrice $M_{ZAMS}=40\rm M_{\odot }$ ed energia $E>10^{52}$ erg sono quelli più in disaccordo coi valori osservati (con le maggiori discrepanze osservate per Si, S ed Ar), mentre abbiamo ottenuto risultati nettamente migliori con modelli meno energetici come quelli con $E=6.7\times 10^{51}$ erg ed $M_{ZAMS}=25\rm M_{\odot }$ (modello 25a) e con $E=0.6\times 10^{51}$ erg ed $M_{ZAMS}=25\rm M_{\odot }$ (25b). Abbiamo trovato un discreto accordo anche con un modello di esplosione sferica, quello con $E=1\times 10^{51}$ erg ed $M_{ZAMS}=25\rm M_{\odot }$ (25Sa). I valori predetti da questi modelli ed i nostri risultati osservativi sono confrontati in Fig. 57.

In conclusione la nostra analisi ha mostrato che l'associazione di W49B con un $\gamma$-ray burst non appare supportata da chiare evidenze osservative, ma che sono presenti chiare indicazioni di un'esplosione asferica.
Explosive nucleosynthesis and stellar explosions. The rest W49B - astropa.inaf .it

** Electron spogliato di silicio, zolfo e atomi di ferro da W49B - teoria prevede che per questo si verifichi è necessario temps di 17-30 milioni di gradi centigradi (in un universo di gravità)

« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 04:29:36 by electrobleme »

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Black Holes - you can have any colour you like as long as its not black
« Reply #10 on: January 10, 2010, 05:31:14 »

Black Holes - why so bright?

ultraluminous X-ray source (ULX) in NGC1399 - Black Hole or something that produces lots of light, Xrays and magnet fields?

Black Holes are the God of astronomy - they cant be observed/measured but they are said to create or destroy most stuff and MUST be there. How could the Universe that we live in create anything like this? It makes no sense, it is not logical. That's because Black Holes do not exist. Something is there or happening but its not a Black Hole. Infact they dont seem to be Black as nearly every area they are found in is super bright. They also spit out immense jets, Xrays etc Everything about them says Electrical Universe activity. You could say that the ultraluminous sources actually create the light but how many of these need to be found or associated by Black Holes (that cant be seen or detected) before you start to think that something is a bit odd and perhaps there is no such thing as a BH? So what is it instead?

Think about what you were told a Black Hole was 20 or 10 years ago, what it is today and then note how it changes over the years. It is like nothing they predict because a Black Hole does not exist. View the data with different eyes and you will see what could be there and what is more sensible considering the Universe that we live in.

This report shows how models/theories are based on previous ideas with no real evidence. The only facts in this report seem to be the amazing amount of light, Xrays and gases, the rest is all hypothetical.

Quote
New results from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and the Magellan telescopes suggest that a dense stellar remnant has been ripped apart by a black hole a thousand times as massive as the Sun.

If confirmed, this discovery would be a cosmic double play: it would be strong evidence for an intermediate mass black hole, which has been a hotly debated topic, and would mark the first time such a black hole has been caught tearing a star apart.

This scenario is based on Chandra observations, which revealed an unusually luminous source of X-rays in a dense cluster of old stars, and optical observations that showed a peculiar mix of elements associated with the X-ray emission. Taken together, a case can be made that the X-ray emission is produced by debris from a disrupted white dwarf star that is heated as it falls towards a massive black hole. The optical emission comes from debris further out that is illuminated by these X-rays.

The intensity of the X-ray emission places the source in the "ultraluminous X-ray source" or ULX category, meaning that it is more luminous than any known stellar X-ray source, but less luminous than the bright X-ray sources (active galactic nuclei) associated with supermassive black holes in the nuclei of galaxies. The nature of ULXs is a mystery, but one suggestion is that some ULXs are black holes with masses between about a hundred and several thousand times that of the Sun, a range intermediate between stellar-mass black holes and supermassive black holes located in the nuclei of galaxies.

This ULX is in a globular cluster, a very old and crowded conglomeration of stars. Astronomers have suspected that globular clusters could contain intermediate-mass black holes, but conclusive evidence for this has been elusive.

"Astronomers have made cases for stars being torn apart by supermassive black holes in the centers of galaxies before, but this is the first good evidence for such an event in a globular cluster," said Jimmy Irwin of the University of Alabama who led the study.

Irwin and his colleagues obtained optical spectra of the object using the Magellan I and II telescopes in Las Campanas, Chile. These data reveal emission from gas rich in oxygen and nitrogen but no hydrogen, a rare set of signals from globular clusters. The physical conditions deduced from the spectra suggest that the gas is orbiting a black hole of at least 1,000 solar masses. The abundant amount of oxygen and absence of hydrogen indicate that the destroyed star was a white dwarf, the end phase of a solar-type star that has burned its hydrogen leaving a high concentration of oxygen. The nitrogen seen in the optical spectrum remains an enigma.

"We think these unusual signatures can be explained by a white dwarf that strayed too close to a black hole and was torn apart by the extreme tidal forces," said coauthor Joel Bregman of the University of Michigan.

Theoretical work suggests that the tidal disruption-induced X-ray emission could stay bright for more than a century, but it should fade with time. So far, the team has observed there has been a 35 percent in X-ray emission from 2000 to 2008.

The ULX in this study is located in NGC 1399, an elliptical galaxy about 65 million light years from Earth.
Massive Black Hole Implicated in Stellar Destruction

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Black Holes - when is a Black Hole not a Black Hole?
« Reply #11 on: January 10, 2010, 06:03:51 »

When is a Black Hole not a Black Hole?

Quote
Astronomers Find Evidence For Tens Of Thousands Of Black Holes
UCLA astronomers present the first evidence that tens of thousands of black holes are orbiting the monstrous black hole at the center of the Milky Way, 26,000 light years away...
...The supermassive black hole, with a mass more than 3 million times that of our sun, is in the constellation of Sagittarius. Black holes are collapsed stars so dense that nothing can escape their gravitational pull, not even light. Black holes cannot be seen directly, but their influence on nearby stars is visible, and provides a signature. The black hole at the center of our galaxy came into existence billions of years ago, perhaps as very massive stars collapsed at the end of their life cycles and coalesced into a single, supermassive object.
Astronomers Find Evidence For Tens Of Thousands Of Black Holes

Quote
Heaviest Stellar Black Hole Discovered In Nearby Galaxy
Astronomers have located an exceptionally massive black hole in orbit around a huge companion star. This result has intriguing implications for the evolution and ultimate fate of massive stars...
..."This discovery raises all sorts of questions about how such a big black hole could have been formed,"...
...The properties of the M33 X-7 binary system - a massive black hole in a close orbit around a massive companion star - are difficult to explain using conventional models for the evolution of massive stars. The parent star for the black hole must have had a mass greater than the existing companion in order to have formed a black hole before the companion star...
...This process typically results in a large amount of mass being lost from the system, so much that the parent star should not have been able to form a 15.7 solar-mass black hole. The black hole's progenitor must have shed gas at a rate about 10 times less than predicted by models before it exploded...
...Since black holes can't be seen -- because they trap all matter and light that enters them -- they are detected by the gravitational effects they have on nearby stars or other matter that is near them. This team made their calculations by measuring the motion of a star as it orbited abound the black hole, known as M33 X-7. The black hole completes one orbit every 3.45 days around its massive companion star...
Heaviest Stellar Black Hole Discovered In Nearby Galaxy

Quote
Massive Black Hole Smashes Record
Using two NASA satellites, astronomers have discovered the heftiest known black hole to orbit a star. The new black hole, with a mass 24 to 33 times that of our Sun, is more massive than scientists expected for a black hole that formed from a dying star.
..."We weren’t expecting to find a stellar-mass black hole this massive," says Andrea Prestwich of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass...
...The black hole’s large mass is surprising because massive stars generate powerful winds that blow off a large fraction of the star’s mass before it explodes. Calculations suggest massive stars in our galaxy leave behind black holes no heavier than about 15 to 20 Suns...
Massive Black Hole Smashes Record

Quote
X-Rays Signal Presence Of Elusive Intermediate-Mass Black Hole
A University of Michigan team's finding of peculiar x-ray outbursts coming from a black hole indicate that the object has a mass of about 10,000 suns, which would make it part of a new class of black holes.
The timing and regularity of these outbursts, observed by a team of U-M researchers at NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory, make the object one of the best candidates yet for a so-called intermediate-mass black hole.
Scientists have strong evidence for the existence of stellar black holes that are about 10 times as massive as the sun. They have also discovered that supermassive black holes with masses as large as billions of suns exist in the centers of most galaxies. Recent evidence has suggested that a new class of black holes may exist between these extremes—intermediate-mass black holes with masses equal to thousands of suns...
...Some astronomers believe these mysterious ULXs are more powerful because they are intermediate mass black holes. Others think ULXs are regular stellar-mass black holes that appear to be much more powerful in X-rays because their radiation is beamed in a jet toward Earth...
X-Rays Signal Presence Of Elusive Intermediate-Mass Black Hole

stellar mass black hole feeding on the globular star cluster in galaxy NGC4472 (M49) in the virgo cluster. or is it something else that is not feeding but being powered by the local surrroundings?

** Electric Universe = circuits and "wiring" between everything = no circuits no Electric Universe Theory

Quote
Black Hole Boldly Goes Where No Black Hole Has Gone Before
Astronomers have found a black hole where few thought they could ever exist, inside a globular star cluster. The finding has broad implications for the dynamics of stars clusters and also for the existence of a still-speculative new class of black holes called 'intermediate-mass' black holes.
The discovery is reported in the current issue of Nature. Tom Maccarone of the University of Southampton in England leads an international team on the finding, made primarily with the European Space Agency's XMM-Newton satellite.

Globular clusters are dense bundles of thousands to millions of old stars, and many scientists have doubted that black holes could survive in such an exclusive environment. Computer simulations show that a newly formed black hole would first sink towards the centre of the cluster but quickly get gravitationally slingshot out entirely when interacting with the cluster's myriad stars.

The new finding provides the first convincing evidence that some black hole might not only survive but grow and flourish in globular clusters. What has astonished astronomers is how quickly the black hole was found.

"We were preparing for a long, systematic search of thousands of globular clusters with the hope of finding just one black hole," said Maccarone. "But bingo, we found one as soon as we started the search. It was only the second globular cluster we looked at."

The search continues to find more, Maccarone said, yet only one black hole was needed to resolve the decades-old discussion about black holes and globular clusters.

Scientists say there are two main classes of black holes. Supermassive black holes containing the mass of millions to billions of suns are found in the core of most galaxies, including our own. A quasar is one kind of supermassive black hole. Stellar-size black holes contain the mass of about ten suns. These are created from the collapsed core of massive stars. Our galaxy likely contains millions of these black holes.

Black holes are, by definition, invisible. But the region around them can flare up periodically when the black hole feeds. As gas falls into a black hole, it will heat to high temperatures and radiate brightly, particularly in X-rays. Maccarone's team found one such stellar-mass black hole by chance feeding in a globular cluster in a galaxy named NGC 4472, about fifty million light-years away in the Virgo Cluster.

XMM-Newton is extremely sensitive to variable X-ray sources and can efficiently search across large patches of the sky. The team also used NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, which has superb angular resolution to pinpoint the X-ray source's location. This allowed them to match up the position of the X-ray source with optical images to prove that the black hole was indeed in a globular cluster.

Globular clusters are some of the oldest structures in the universe, containing stars over 12 thousand million years old. Black holes in a cluster would likely have formed many thousand millions of years ago, which is why astronomers have assumed they would have been kicked out a long time ago.

Details in the X-ray light detected by XMM-Newton leave little doubt that this is a black hole - the object is too bright, and varies by too much to be anything else. In fact, the source is 'extra bright', - an Ultraluminous X-ray object, or ULX. ULXs are brighter than the 'Eddington limit' for stellar mass black holes, the brightness level at which the outward force from X-rays is expected balance the powerful gravitational forces from the black hole. Thus it is often suggested that the ULXs might be intermediate mass black holes – black holes of thousands of solar masses, heavier than the 10-solar-mass stellar black holes, and lighter than the million to thousand million solar mass black holes in quasars. These black holes might then be the missing links between the black holes formed in the death throes of massive stars and the ones in the centres of galaxies.

It is perhaps possible for a stellar-mass black hole to gain enough mass through merging with other stellar-mass black holes or accreting star gas to stay locked in a cluster. About 100 solar masses would do. Once entrenched, the black hole has the opportunity to merge with other black holes or accrete gas from a local neighbourhood rife with star-stuff. In this way, they could grow into IMBHs.

"If a black hole is massive enough, there's a good chance it can survive the pressures of living in a globular cluster, since it will be too heavy to be kicked out," said Arunav Kundu of Michigan State University, a co-author on the Nature report. "That's what is intriguing about this discovery. We may be seeing how a black hole can grow considerably, become more entrenched in the cluster, and then grow some more.

"On the other hand," continued Kundu, "there are a variety of ways to make ULXs without requiring intermediate mass black holes. In particular, if the light goes out in a different direction than the one from which the gas comes in, it doesn't put any force on the gas. Also, if the light can be 'focused' towards us by reflecting off the gas in the same way that light from a flashlight bulb bounces off the little mirror in the flashlight, making the object appear brighter than it really is."

Ongoing work will help to determine whether this object is a stellar-mass black hole showing an unusual manner of sucking in gas, allowing it to be extra bright, or an IMBH. The team, which also includes Steve Zepf from Michigan State University, and Katherine Rhode from Wesleyan University, has data for thousands of other globular clusters, which they are now analyzing in an effort to determine just how common this phenomenon is.
Black Hole Boldly Goes Where No Black Hole Has Gone Before

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Dark God?
« Reply #12 on: January 12, 2010, 07:46:33 »
Dark God?

If Dark Energy and Dark Matter can not be seen or measured but have to be there to make it all balance and work are they a sign or are they God? Scientists say that God does not exist because there is no evidence of a God yet they have created Dark Energy, Dark Matter, Dark Attractor ... (I am not saying that God does or doesnt exist : )

Quote
With its successful test run at the end of 2009, the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, Switzerland, is poised  to answer some of the most vexing problems of modern physics and. open new frontiers in understanding space and time, the microstructure of matter and the laws of nature.

One of the profound of the unsolved problems is the missing mass of the universe. We know that the matter that makes up our existence as well as every onservable object in the universe, is a mere fraction -- 20 percent -- of the matter in the universe. The remaining 80 percent apparently is mysterious "dark matter"- its existence is inferred only via its gravitational pull on visible matter. LHC collisions could produce dark-matter particles so we can study their properties directly and thereby unveil a totally new face of the universe.

The LHC could also shed light on "dark energy," which is causing the universe's expansion to accelerate. If the acceleration continues, the ultimate fate of  a very, cold universe, with all particles flying away from one another to infinite distances.

One of the most fascinating discoveries of our new century may be imminent if the Large Hadron Collider produces nano-blackholes when it goes live again. According to the best current physics, such nano blackholes could not be produced with the energy levels the LHC can generate, but coud only come into being if a parallel universe were providing extra gravitational input. Versions of multiverse theory suggest that there is at least one other universe very close to our own, perhaps only a millimeter away. This makes it possible that some of the effects, especially gravity, "leak through," which could be responsible for the production of dark energy and dark matter that make up 96% of the universe.

A huge volume of space that includes the Milky Way and super-clusters of galaxies is flowing towards a mysterious, gigantic unseen mass named mass astronomers have dubbed "The Great Attractor," some 250 million light years from our Solar System.

The Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are the dominant structures in a galaxy cluster called the Local Group which is, in turn, an outlying member of the Virgo supercluster. Andromeda--about 2.2 million light-years from the Milky Way--is speeding toward our galaxy at 200,000 miles per hour.

This motion can only be accounted for by gravitational attraction, even though the mass that we can observe is not nearly great enough to exert that kind of pull. The only thing that could explain the movement of Andromeda is the gravitational pull of a lot of unseen mass--perhaps the equivalent of 10 Milky Way-size galaxies--lying between the two galaxies.

Meanwhile, our entire Local Group is hurtling toward the center of the Virgo Cluster at one million miles per hour.

The Milky Way and its neighboring Andromeda galaxy, along with some 30 smaller ones, form what is known as the Local Group, which lies on the outskirts of a “super cluster”—a grouping of thousands of galaxies—known as Virgo, which is also pulled toward the Great Attractor. Based on the velocities at these scales, the unseen mass inhabiting the voids between the galaxies and clusters of galaxies amounts to perhaps 10 times more than the visible matter.

Even so, adding this invisible material to luminous matter brings the average mass density of the universe still to within only 10-30 percent of the critical density needed to "close" the universe. This phenomena suggests that the universe be "open." Cosmologists continue to debate this question, just as they are also trying to figure out the nature of the missing mass, or "dark matter."

It is believed that this dark matter dictates the structure of the Universe on the grandest of scales. Dark matter gravitationally attracts normal matter, and it is this normal matter that astronomers see forming long thin walls of super-galactic clusters.

Recent measurements with telescopes and space probes of the distribution of mass in M31 -the largest galaxy in the neighborhood of the Milky Way- and other galaxies led to the recognition that galaxies are filled with dark matter and have shown that a mysterious force—a dark energy—fills the vacuum of empty space, accelerating the universe's expansion.

Astronomers now recognize that the eventual fate of the universe is inextricably tied to the presence of dark energy and dark matter.The current standard model for cosmology describes a universe that is 70 percent dark energy, 25 percent dark matter, and only 5 percent normal matter.

We don't know what dark energy is, or why it exists. On the other hand, particle theory tells us that, at the microscopic level, even a perfect vacuum bubbles with quantum particles that are a natural source of dark energy. But a naïve calculation of the dark energy generated from the vacuum yields a value 10120 times larger than the amount we observe. Some unknown physical process is required to eliminate most, but not all, of the vacuum energy, leaving enough left to drive the accelerating expansion of the universe.

A new theory of particle physics is required to explain this physical process.

The universe as we see it contains only the stable relics and leftovers of the big bang: unstable particles have decayed away with time, and the perfect symmetries have been broken as the universe has cooled, but the structure of space remembers all the particles and forces we can no longer see around us.

Discovering what it is that makes up the heart of the Great Attractor -- will surely rank as one of the greatest discoveries in the history of science.

Recent findings suggest these motions are the result of gravitational forces from not one, but two things: the Great Attractor, and a conglomerate of galaxies far beyond it.

The location of the Great Attractor was finally determined in 1986 and lies at a distance of 250 million light years  from the Milky Way, in the direction of the Hydra and Centaurus constellations. That region of space is dominated by the Norma cluster, a massive cluster of galaxies, and contains a preponderance of large, old galaxies, many of which are colliding with their neighbors, and or radiating large amounts of radio waves.

Major concentration of galaxies lies beyond the Great Attractor, near the so-called Shapley Supercluster, 500 million light-years away—the most massive known super-cluster. Mapping X-ray luminous galaxy clusters in the Great Attractor region has shown that the pull our galaxy is experiencing is most likely due to both the nearby Great Attractor and these more distant structures.

In the 1987, a group of astronomers known as the "Seven Samurai," at Cal Tech  uncovered this coordinated motion of the Milky Way and our several million nearest galactic neighbors. They found that galaxies are very unevenly distributed in space, with galactic super-clusters separated by incredibly huge voids of visible ordinary matter. The place towards which we all appear headed was originally called the New Supergalactic Center or the Very Massive Object until one of the discoverers, Alan Dressler, decided they needed a more evocative name and came up with "The Great Attractor."

The motion of local galaxies indicated there was something massive out there that are pulling the Milky Way, the Andromeda Galaxy, and other nearby galaxies towards it. For a while, nobody could see what it was, because it lies behind the plane of our Galaxy --- that means the gas and dust in our Galaxy obscures the light from the Great Attractor, and it is outshone by the stars and other objects in our Galaxy.

The Great Attractor is a diffuse concentration of matter some 400 million light-years in size located around 250 million light-years away within the so-called "Centaurus Wall" of galaxies , about seven degrees off the plane of the Milky Way. X-ray observations with the ROSAT satellite then revealed that Abell 3627 is at the center of the Great Attractor. It lies in the so-called Zone of Avoidance, where the dust and stars of the Milky Way's disk obscures as much as a quarter of the Earth's visible sky.

Casey Kazan
Will the LHC Solve the Mystery of "The Great Attractor"?

WOW. Our taxes pay for this...for the experiments, education, wages, pensions...

Quote
With its successful test run at the end of 2009, the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, Switzerland, seized the world record for the highest-energy particle collisions created by mankind. We can now reflect on the next questions: What will it discover, and why should we care?

Despite all we have learned in physics -- from properties of faraway galaxies to the deep internal structure of the protons and neutrons that make up an atomic nucleus -- we still face vexing mysteries. The collider is poised to begin to unravel them. By colliding protons at ultra-high energies and allowing scientists to observe the outcome in its mammoth detectors, the LHC could open new frontiers in understanding space and time, the microstructure of matter and the laws of nature.

We know, for example, that all the types of matter we see, that constitute our ordinary existence, are a mere fraction -- 20 percent -- of the matter in the universe. The remaining 80 percent apparently is mysterious "dark matter"; though it is all around us, its existence is inferred only via its gravitational pull on visible matter. LHC collisions might produce dark-matter particles so we can study their properties directly and thereby unveil a totally new face of the universe.

The collider might also shed light on the more predominant "dark energy," which is causing the universe's expansion to accelerate. If the acceleration continues, the ultimate fate of the universe may be very, very cold, with all particles flying away from one another to infinite distances.

More widely anticipated is the discovery of the Higgs particle -- sometimes inaptly called the God particle -- whose existence is postulated to explain why some matter has mass. Were it not for the Higgs, or something like it, the electrons in our bodies would behave like light beams, shooting into space, and we would not exist.

If the Higgs is not discovered, its replacement may involve something as profound as another layer of substructure to matter. It might be that the most elementary known particles, like the quarks that make up a proton, are made from tinier things. This would be revolutionary -- like discovering the substructure of the atom, but at a deeper level.

More profound still, the LHC may reveal extra dimensions of space, beyond the three that we see. The existence of a completely new type of dimension -- what is called "supersymmetry" -- means that all known particles have partner particles with related properties. Supersymmetry could be discovered by the LHC producing these "superpartners," which would make characteristic splashes in its detectors. Superpartners may also make up dark matter -- and two great discoveries would be made at once.

Or, the LHC may find evidence for extra dimensions of a more ordinary type, like those that we see -- still a major revolution. If these extra dimensions exist, they must be wound up into a small size, which would explain in part why we can't see or feel them directly. The LHC detectors might find evidence of particles related to the ones we know but shooting off into these dimensions.

Even more intriguing, if these extra dimensions are configured in certain ways, the LHC could produce microscopic black holes. As first realized by Stephen Hawking, basic principles of quantum physics tell us that such black holes evaporate in about a billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a second -- in a spectacular spray of particles that would be visible to LHC detectors.

This would let us directly probe the deep mystery of reconciling two conflicting pillars of 20th century physics: Einstein's theory of general relativity and quantum mechanics. This conflict produces a paradox -- related to the riddle of what happens to stuff that falls into a black hole -- whose resolution may involve ideas more mind-bending than those of quantum mechanics or relativity.

Other possible discoveries include new forces of nature, similar to electric or magnetic forces. Any of these discoveries would represent a revolution in physics, though one that had been already considered. We may also discover something utterly new and unexpected -- perhaps the most exciting possibility of all. Even not discovering anything is important -- it would tell us where phenomena we know must exist are not to be found.

Such talk of new phenomena has worried some -- might ultra-high-energy particle collisions be dangerous? The simple answer is no. Though it will be very novel to produce these conditions in a laboratory, where they can be carefully studied, nature is performing similar experiments all the time, above our heads. Cosmic ray protons with energies over a million times those at the LHC regularly strike the protons in our atmosphere, and in other cosmic bodies, without calamity. Also, there are significant indications that nature performed such experiments early in the universe, near the Big Bang, without untoward consequences. Physicists have carefully investigated these concerns on multiple occasions.

All this may seem like impractical and esoteric knowledge. But modern society would be unrecognizable without discoveries in fundamental physics. Radio and TV, X-rays, CT scans, MRIs, PCs, iPhones, the GPS system, the Web and beyond -- much that we take for granted would not exist without this type of physics research and was not predicted when the first discoveries were made. Likewise, we cannot predict what future discoveries will lead to, whether new energy sources, means of space travel or communication, or amazing things entirely unimagined.

The cost of this research may appear high -- about \$10 billion for the LHC -- but it amounts to less than a ten-thousandth of the gross domestic product of the U.S. or Europe over the approximately 10 years it has taken to build the collider. This is a tiny investment when one accounts for the continuing value of such research to society.

But beyond practical considerations, we should ponder what the value of the LHC could be to the human race. If it performs as anticipated, it will be the cutting edge for years to come in a quest that dates to the ancient Greeks and beyond -- to understand what our world is made of, how it came to be and what will become of it. This grand odyssey gives us a chance to rise above the mundane aspects of our lives, and our differences, conflicts and crises, and try to understand where we, as a species, fit in a wondrous universe that seems beyond comprehension, yet is remarkably comprehensible.
___

Steve Giddings is a physics professor at the University of California Santa Barbara and an expert in high-energy and gravitational physics. He co-authored the first papers predicting that black hole production could be an important effect at the LHC and describing certain extradimensional scenarios that the LHC might explore.
What will the Large Hadron Collider reveal? - physorg .com

And when the LHC (which shows how nature accelerates the Solar winds, both fast and slow) does not find the "God particle" will they either declare that the theories they have based their science on is wrong or say that they need more money to get a more powerful machine even closer to the speed of light then they will find it...

And will they refund us our money?
« Last Edit: January 12, 2010, 08:12:33 by electrobleme »

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Lightning, Sticky Tape, and Black Hole Observations - Part 1 and 2
« Reply #13 on: January 13, 2010, 05:10:53 »
Black Holes or this explanation of what is there?

The following brilliant 2 articles were posted on Thunderbolts.info in the TPOD (Thunderbolts of The Day). The first part is a good set up for the stunning second part. This is what the Electric Universe Theory is all about.

Dark Stuff that they dont know what it is, why it exists, can not be seen or measured, makes up 80-95% of the Universe or a simpler model that works logically from what we can measure, observe and experiment with?

Quote
Lightning, Sticky Tape, and Black Hole Observations - Part 1
Jan 07, 2009
The theory of "black holes" has received another blow from direct observation. It seems that their x-ray and light emissions more closely resemble the behavior of lightning than the supposed behavior of black holes.

A recent report in October 2008 concerns the close correlation of X-ray and optical light emissions from two black hole candidates: GX 339-4 and Swift J1753.5-0127. Each system is theorized to have a black hole in orbit around a normal star. This report describes how these systems were observed in X-ray and optical light at the same time. The surprise was that the optical light and X-ray emissions were closely synchronized to each other and obviously coupled to a common physical cause.

This observation completely contradicts current theory which predicts that X-ray and optical emissions result from entirely different mechanisms in these black hole binaries. What we’ll show below is that the synchronized X-ray and optical emissions, both in their nature and timing, correspond very well to what we now know about terrestrial lightning as well as plasma arcs at even smaller scales.

Let’s break down this analysis by looking at the black hole binary systems in question, understanding the data and observations, discussing briefly some relatively new things we’ve learned about terrestrial lightning and other electrical arc phenomena, and then seeing how it all ties together.

GX 339-4 was first discovered in 1973 and is considered a black hole candidate (BHC) due to its X-ray emission patterns (which, following circular reasoning, were similar to other BHC’s). GX 339-4 is a binary system where the black hole is thought to orbit its dim companion star about once every 1.7 days. The optical counterpart was only discovered in 1982 when it flared very brightly at the time.

Swift J1753.5-0127 is also theorized to be a candidate for a black hole simply because of its X-ray emissions. It was discovered in 2005 when a particularly violent X-ray outburst was picked up by the Swift Burst Alert Telescope in 2005. In July 2008, Zurita et al. determined that the BHC orbits around what is likely a main sequence star with an orbital period of 3.2 hours. Again, it is a “transient X-ray” black hole binary with an optical counterpart.

It is important to note that no one has observed a black hole. There’s an X-ray source that’s been mapped to a location in the sky. Everything else: black holes, accretion disks, that’s all interpretation. Ignore the artist’s conception in the report for a moment and understand what is really being observed here.

There’s an X-ray bright spot that flickers in X-ray wavelengths, and that is assumed to be a black hole with an accretion disk (because that was assumed in another paper by someone else). As it happens, there’s an optical counterpart (something seen in the same location in the sky in visible wavelength) for this X-ray source. So we see a bright spot in optical and we see a bright spot in X-ray. These bright spots “shimmer” in X-ray and optical light in about the same place in the night sky. So be careful with these artist’s conceptions of accretion disks and so on. No one has seen that.

Both systems are believed to be two bodies separated by a few million kilometers. That is very close, well within Mercury’s orbit relative to the Sun for example. Theory dictates that the X-rays originate in an accretion disk formed around the black hole fed by heated matter pulled out of the optical counterpart (a star like our sun).

The optical light is thought to be a secondary product of X-rays energizing the surrounding gases. However, the findings completely rule out that model. The investigative lead, Poshak Gandhi, states, "Instead the variations in the X-ray and visible light output must have some common origin, and one very close to the black hole itself."

In the original report on GX 339-4, Ghandi et al. show that, over their nights of observation, the optical peak lagged the X-ray peaks by about 150 ms. The authors in their discussion begin to hypothesize about reconnecting magnetic field lines, dense magnetized blobs falling towards the black hole, etc. I won’t get into “reconnecting magnetic field lines” and the physical implausibility of that idea. However, there are other sources on this website that discuss that particular fiction in some detail.

Similar cross-correlation between the timing of the X-ray and optical emissions were also noted for Swift J1753.5-0127. In this case there was an optical dip that preceded the X-ray peak followed by a weak optical peak. In another report on X-ray transient XTE J1118-480, Kanbach et al. (2001) found that the optical peak lagged the X-ray peak by about 0.5 seconds with an odd “precognition blip” before the X-ray. Durant et al. state at the end of their article that “....there exists a causal link between the optical emission and the X-ray emission.” I would like to propose that this causal link is probably something a lot like lightning.

To be continued.

Contributed by Thomas Wilson
Lightning, Sticky Tape, and Black Hole Observations - Part 1 | TPOD

Quote
Lightning, Sticky Tape, and Black Hole Observations - Part 2
Jan 12, 2010
Embarrassingly little is known about terrestrial lightning, although it strikes the Earth about 3 million times per day.

In 2003 it was proven that lightning emits X-rays and gamma rays a short time before the visible flash. The first such study in Nature reported a very interesting time correlation between the X-ray transmission and the optical/UV transmission. To quote the original report:

“They measured intense bursts of X-rays, gamma rays and fast-moving electrons - just before each visible flash. The bursts typically lasted less than 100 microseconds. ‘I think it's really exciting,’ said co-researcher Martin Uman. ‘We didn't expect to see anything at all, and then, all of a sudden, with almost every lightning stroke, we had X-rays.’”

Like the astronomers, even lightning experts are sometimes surprised.

A good reference source on lightning reads: “It has been recently revealed that most lightning emits an intense burst of X-rays and/or gamma-rays which seem to be produced during the stepped-leader and dart-leader phases just before the stroke becomes visible. The X-ray bursts typically have a total duration of less than 100 microseconds and have energies extending up to nearly a few hundred thousand electron volts”

Lightning is not the only plasma arc phenomenon with this X-ray/optical light correlation. One of plasma's unique aspects is that it is scaleable. Another report describes X-ray emission preceding optical emissions in a series of observations of 80-cm sparks produced in a laboratory. Like other plasma phenomena, the behavior is complicated.

In most of the cases, the X-ray emissions occurred during the pre-discharge activity in the gap. In some cases, X-ray emissions occurred in the pre-discharge phase as well as with a weaker peak during the voltage collapse across the gap. However, in all cases the X-ray and optical/UV emissions were closely synchronized events.

It gets better though. Static discharge sparks caused by ripping up sticky tape generates X-rays as well. I really cannot do better than the original abstract by Camara et al. (2008) (their references are removed, please see the link for the relevant citations):

“Relative motion between two contacting surfaces can produce visible light, called triboluminescence. This concentration of diffuse mechanical energy into electromagnetic radiation has previously been observed to extend even to X-ray energies. Here we report that peeling common adhesive tape in a moderate vacuum produces radio and visible emission along with nanosecond, 100-mW X-ray pulses that are correlated with stick–slip peeling events … The intensity of X-ray triboluminescence allowed us to use it as a source for X-ray imaging. The limits on energies and flash widths that can be achieved are beyond current theories of tribology.”

The astronomers and lightning experts shouldn’t feel too bad. Tribologists get surprised by the Electric Universe, too.

So how does this discussion of black holes, sticky tape, lightning, and the cross-correlation of X-ray and optical emissions all come together? Here’s an Electric Universe interpretation of the GX 339-4 and Swift J1753.5-0127 observations.

Donald Scott has proposed that a star spins faster under greater electrical stress. When the current density is high enough (current per unit area) and the rotational period reaches a threshold value, the star will physically rupture into two parts. The relative sizes of the two parts will be based on the initial conditions in what is essentially a classic chaotic process. This is a catastrophic high energy event accompanied by a bright X-ray burst (these bright X-ray bursts allowed the discovery of Swift J1753.5-0127 in 2005 and XTE J1118-480 in 2000). The average current density for the system will decrease due to the increase in surface area for the two bodies combined.

However, these bodies will be orbiting very closely to each other (as is observed) and will likely continue an energetic electrical exchange for some time. One could predict that the plasma between the two bodies might periodically flash into arc mode, because the electrical exchange is so energetic The electrical arcing would resemble any other arc event (be it lightning, an 80-cm spark or the tiny sparks caused by peeling normal adhesive tape) in showing a complex interplay between X-ray/gamma ray emissions and optical/UV emissions. This is exactly what is observed in these “black hole” systems.

So the Electric Universe artist’s impression is different. We can imagine two stellar bodies that have ruptured from a single Electric Star, one of which may have a current density high enough to radiate as a sun like our own star. The other star could be darker, unable to go past normal glow mode because it lacks sufficient current density.

Without a photosphere, the star would have only a corona with its X-ray emission; it would be a white dwarf. There is no black hole. Between these two closely spaced, mutually orbiting stellar bodies might be periodic electrical arcing. This electrical arcing might exhibit closely synchronized, and complex, X-ray and optical/UV emissions.

Interestingly, Ghandi in the report above even refers to the accretion disk as “intense energy flows of electrically charged matter.” This is rare admission of electricity by a mainstream astronomer. He’s right. It is electrically charged matter. However, the dominant role of electricity in the evolution and ongoing dynamics of binary systems is still missing in his interpretation.

In a philosophical vein, it is noteworthy that the conventional view is one of a black hole consuming a normal binary companion. Essentially, this is a destructive event. The black hole will consume its binary and then eventually evaporate and go “poof” in a splash of gravitational waves. In contrast, the Electric Universe interpretation is one of creation. The fissioning of the original star creates a new binary or is the beginning of a new planetary system.

Following this line of reasoning a little further, it is interesting to contrast these schools of thought, Gravity versus Electricity, from another philosophical perspective. As it happens, the gravity-dominated paradigm is rich in dark models and metaphors. Black holes, dark matter, and dark energy are unknowable entities.

Light does not escape black holes, so they are unobservable; dark matter and dark energy are by definition unobservable. Accepting these abstractions as reality means accepting that about 99% of our Universe is unobservable and unknowable. Beyond that idea being just depressing, it is scientifically unsatisfactory and a philosophical dead-end.

In the Electric Universe, 99% of the Universe is plasma: observable, measurable plasma. This is a state of matter we can replicate in a lab and study. We see it every day in the lightning and the aurora of our terrestrial skies and in the static electricity when we take off our sweaters. The Electric Universe paradigm speaks of light, of “coronae,” “glow mode,” “sparks,” “lightning,” and so forth. The two paradigms did not set out with these dark and light metaphors a priori. The metaphors evolved after the fact. However, it is interesting how the two metaphorical systems evolved so differently.

For instance, in different languages light is often associated with knowledge: a bright idea, a brilliant concept, illumination. In contrast, ignorance is often burdened with dark metaphors: a dim fellow, the Dark Ages, a “cloud of ignorance.”

In the Electric Universe there are no hidden things we cannot know. The Universe is there in all its electrical nature for us to see and discover and understand. Yes, the Plasma Universe is complicated and chaotic in its behavior and will not be bludgeoned into a set of field equations on a T-shirt. It is predictable, measurable and knowable with proper experimentation and scientific methodology. In the Electric Universe movement, we eschew the Gravity-Dominated view that we are doomed to be ignorant about 99% of our Universe. We choose the opportunity to know. We choose the light.

Contributed by Thomas Wilson
Lightning, Sticky Tape, and Black Hole Observations - Part 2 | TPOD

#### electrobleme

• Plasma Star
• Posts: 1504
• EUreka?: +1/-0
• It's time to step out of the Gravity, Well?
##### Why Won't the Supernova Explode? NASA article on models/theory not working
« Reply #14 on: January 13, 2010, 21:49:12 »

supercomputer models say no...

A supercomputer model of a rapidly-spinning, core-collapse supernova. NuSTAR observations of actual supernova remnants will provide vital data for such models and help explain how massive supernovas manage to explode Credit: Fiona Harrison/Caltech

The astronomers models of supernova explosions run on supercomputers do not explode. Instead of looking at the basics of their theory they assume that some other force is pushing supernova outwards because their theories can not be wrong. There is no evidence that might put their ideas in doubt?

Quote
Why Won't the Supernova Explode?

A massive old star is about to die a spectacular death. As its nuclear fuel runs out, it begins to collapse under its own tremendous weight. The crushing pressure inside the star skyrockets, triggering new nuclear reactions, setting the stage for a terrifying blast. And then... nothing happens.

At least that's what supercomputers have been telling astrophysicists for decades. Many of the best computer models of supernova explosions fail to produce an explosion. Instead, according to the simulations, gravity wins the day and the star simply collapses.

Clearly, physicists are missing something.

"We don't really understand how supernovas of massive stars work yet," says Fiona Harrison, an astrophysicist at the California Institute of Technology. The death of relatively small stars is better understood, but for larger stars — those with more than about 9 times the mass of our sun — the physics just doesn't add up.

Something must be helping the outward push of radiation and other pressures overcome the inward squeeze of gravity. To figure out what that "something" is, scientists need to examine the inside of a real supernova while it's exploding — not a particularly easy thing to do!

But that's exactly what Harrison intends to do with a new space telescope she and her colleagues are developing called the Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array, or NuSTAR.

After it launches in 2011 aboard a Pegasus rocket, NuSTAR will give scientists an unprecedented view of high-energy X-rays coming from supernova remnants, black holes, blazars, and other extreme cosmic phenomena. NuSTAR will be the first space telescope that can actually focus these high-energy X-rays, producing images roughly 100 times sharper than those possible with previous telescopes.

Using NuSTAR, scientists will look for clues to conditions inside the exploding star etched into the pattern of elements spread throughout the nebula that remains after the star explodes.

"You don't get the opportunity to watch these explosions very often, ones that are close enough to study in detail," Harrison says. "What we can do is study the remnants. The composition and distribution of the material in the remnants tells you a lot about the explosion."

One element in particular is of keen interest: titanium-44. Creating this isotope of titanium through nuclear fusion requires a certain combination of energy, pressure, and raw materials. Inside the collapsing star, that combination occurs at a depth that's very special. Everything below that depth will succumb to gravity and collapse inward to form a black hole. Everything above that depth will be blown outward in the explosion. Titanium-44 is created right at the cusp.

So the pattern of how titanium-44 is spread throughout a nebula can reveal a lot about what happened at that crucial threshold during the explosion. And with that information, scientists might be able to figure out what's wrong with their computer simulations.

Some scientists believe the computer models are too symmetrical. Until recently, even with powerful supercomputers, scientists have only been able to simulate a one-dimensional sliver of the star. Scientists just assume that the rest of the star behaves similarly, making the simulated implosion the same in all radial directions.

But what if that assumption is wrong?

"Asymmetries could be the key," Harrison says. In an asymmetrical collapse, outward forces could break through in some places even if the crush of gravity is overpowering in others. Indeed, more recent, two-dimensional simulations suggest that asymmetries could help solve the mystery of the "non-exploding supernova."

If NuSTAR finds that titanium-44 is spread unevenly, it would be evidence that the explosions themselves were also asymmetrical, Harrison explains.

To detect titanium-44, NuSTAR needs to be able to focus very high energy X-rays. Titanium-44 is radioactive, and when it decays it releases gamma rays with an energy of 68 kilo-electronvolts (keV). Existing X-ray space telescopes, such as NASA's Chandra X-Ray Observatory, can only focus X-rays up to about 15 keV.

Normal lenses can't focus X-rays at all. Glass bends X-rays only a miniscule amount, so for a glass lens to bend X-rays enough to focus them, it would have to be so thick that it would adsorb the X-rays instead.

X-ray telescopes use an entirely different kind of lens. Called a Wolter-I optic, it consists of many cylindrical shells, each one slightly smaller and placed inside the last. The result looks a bit like the layers of a cylindrical onion (if there were such a thing), with small gaps between the layers.

Incoming X-rays pass between these layers, which guide the X-rays to the focal surface. It's not a lens, strictly speaking, because the X-rays reflect off the surfaces instead of passing through them the way light passes through a glass lens. But the end result is the same.

NuSTAR's Wolter-I optic has a special atomic-precision coating that enables its layers to reflect X-rays with energies as high as 79 keV. Harrison and her colleagues have spent years perfecting the delicate manufacturing techniques for making these high-precision layers. Together with a new sensor that can tolerate these high energies, these finely crafted layers are what enable NuSTAR to image these relatively unexplored, high-intensity X-rays.

And the discoveries won't stop with supernovas. High-energy X-rays are emitted by many of the universe's most extreme phenomena, including supermassive black holes and blazars. NuSTAR will give us a new window on the universe at its most extreme.

Why Won't the Supernova Explode? | science.nasa.gov