How do we test galaxy rotation

Page 2 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BrankoRBabic

Guest
Thank you Saiph,

by propagative, the thought line is that the primary gravity source affects the intermediary gravitational body. The intermediary having responded to the gravitational effect of the primary source, in real terms, reproduces the primary gravitational properties and so providing continuity of the primary gravitational property. The enquiry as to the likelihood of such propagation in gravity, was directed at the possibility that primary gravitational effect would extend for as long as there is energy mass within reach. If the universe has a boundary than the boundary would be the limit of the gravitational extent and the mass within the universe would be contained within the given volume because of gravitational force. The Millennium Project, would suggest some kind of a gravitational propagation? You may find the enclosed reference useful:

http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/galform/ ... _small.jpg
 
B

BrankoRBabic

Guest
Thank you very much Space Tas.

What a wonderful educator you are. Would you mind if I copied your reply for use elsewhere because it explains things in a very useful way and will be of benefit to another group I am supporting. The gravitational propagative extent, could look something like this, forming a gravitational net:



http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/galform/ ... _small.jpg
 
S

SpaceTas

Guest
Glad it is appreciated.
You are welcome to use as a quote with SpaceTas(IAP) as author.
I may have done the reply on work time (IAP), but there is little distinction for me.

Note that the diagram is from a textbook but it seems to have escaped onto the net.
There are plenty of others (maybe better) out there.
 
B

BrankoRBabic

Guest
Thank you very much Space Tas (IAP).

Your approach is very useful and promotes interest and is excellently clear so it can be followed by those who do not have years of training in the sciences. The problem with presenting physics in textbook type of explanation, is that newcomers to astrophysics switch off, before they can grasp the wonder of the science.
 
B

BrankoRBabic

Guest
I have asked several questions in this thread because they all contribute to a better understanding of the macro scale phenomena that relates to, "energy neither created nor destroyed". I have compiled a Periodic Table of elements that considers atomic structure in energy terms, using atomic mass units as the bases for a very rough calculation of the total amount of energy contained in each atom. See table:

The other side of this equation is what happens when mass aggregates into large masses such as stellar bodies. How are large masses transformed back into energy and the black hole environment would seem to hold the answers. For example, the above jets expel vast quantities of electrons, plasma and presumably other baryonic mass. If the electrons do not interact with the plasma particles, does that mean that plasma particles are ejected into space. Not only will this add to entropy but could this be the mechanism by which dark matter is formed.

An analyses of atomic content and perhaps even molecular make-up, might add better understanding of what happens within the jet environment.

I do not appear to be able to insert a picture of the Periodic Table Graph. Can anyone help, so try:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9708909/Total-Nucleonic-Energy-Periodic-Table
 
B

BrankoRBabic

Guest
Does any information exist which demonstrates the plasma, atomic and or molecular composition of the jets emerging from Centaurus A?
 
S

SpaceTas

Guest
Composition of jets: BrabnkoRubic

The shape of the x-ray, visible, radio spectrum from these jets, is that of synchrotron radiation which is confirmed by polarization measurements. Synchrotron radiation is caused by charged particles moving in curved paths with a magnetic field. The easiest charged particle to accelerate to the high speeds (=energies = temperature) are electrons, because of their low mass. The general picture of the jet goes something like this:
Near the base, near the black hole, hydrogen in the accretion disk is ionized (split into an electron and a proton). The disk forms a magnetic field that is shaped into a spiral funnel perpendicular to the disk anchored at the inner part of the disk near the black hole. A combination of UV light, the magnetic field and other heating accelerates the electrons and protons along the two oppositely directed jets. The speeds reached are large fractions of the speed of light. Knots in similar jets sometimes move near 0.9 C. Eventually material from the outside of the jet gets dragged into the jet (entrained) and eventually the magnetic funnel widens and then weakens to the point where the electrons and protons inside "spill out". At the far end, these electrons hit the surrounding extragalactic material lighting that up as the extended blobs (=Radio lobes). Now since the electrons are much lower mas than the protons they are accelerated to higher speeds than the protons (they have about the same kinetic energy = 1/2 mass velocity squared) and so produce more synchrotron radiation at shorter wavelengths. The peak of the emitted spectrum measures the typical energy of the electrons, while the brightness and polarization give measures of density of electrons, and the magnetic field strength. The magnetic field direction/shape is indicated by the direction of linear polarization.

The protons move slower along the jet; maybe more in the core, or get entrained out more quickly.

So to answer your questions. Both jets are made up of fast moving electrons and protons from hydrogen.
 
B

BrankoRBabic

Guest
Thank you Space Tas,

I find your replies very educational and useful. I will post your reply for further discussion on another site but how come the electrons and the protons don't combine to form hydrogen again. At some stage all contents of the jets must lose enough energy for the electrons to fall back into a stable principal quantum number shell.

Why is only hydrogen ionised ?

One would think that as matter is reduced by the attrition process that all elements would be subject to the acceleration force of the electromagnetic fields within the black hole environment so what happens to the heavier elements present in all stellar mass? Ionisation of elements in synchotronic environments must add to the entropy of the universe and therefore the thermodynamic equilibrium must shift to greater instability; because of the newly added energy and mass escaping from the jets. Ionised matter is more entropic than toms.
 
S

SpaceTas

Guest
Hydrogen because it is 90 % of atoms (by number, not mass). It is also fairly easy to ionize.
Other atoms would contribute electrons, and ions to jet, but the ions (more massive) won't accelerate as fast and won't reach same speeds. Eventually the electrons will find an ion and combine, so universe stays neutral.
 
B

BrankoRBabic

Guest
Perfectly logical Space sta and how else would it be! There is nothing out there which is strange and mysterious. The only limit to understanding the universe is our ability to grasp the way it is.

If it is found that the jets also contain atomic mass numbers greater than 120 or perhaps 200 or higher, could it mean that the energy state within the black hole generates atoms that are much larger than those generated in the rest of the galaxy? No elements outside the periodic table are identified in space.
 
B

BrankoRBabic

Guest
Everything in the universe appears to revolve around thermodynamic stability and the more one gets involved with the subject the more obvious it becomes. All that we see around us, is the way it is because energy mass attains a thermodynamically stable state and it is!

I am very moved by the dynamics of stellar events. The “Eta Corina” star, emits vast jets of mass directly at the opposing ends of the star and yet again, we have an example of a bipolar expulsion of energy mass. This large star is about to undergo a supernova ie explode to create a supernova and create a black hole in the process.

What no one seems to be explaining is the bipolarity of the expulsion of mass energy, seen time and time again in the cosmos. We see it in the above case, we see it in the black hole emissions and we see it in relativistic jets all over the universe. What is the property that promotes the expulsion of mass at exactly the opposite ends of these entities. Could it be a weakness in the gravimetric field of the stellar object or perhaps a magnetosphere.

What could it be that creates the conditions for such perfect symmetry in the escape of mass energy in these objects. Anyone got any ideas.
 
M

MeteorWayne

Guest
You hit it right, it is due to the interaction of the mass and a magnetic field.
 
S

SpaceTas

Guest
Rotation leads to bipolar symmetry eg. the big ejections eta Carina at the rotation poles where stellar wind is not restricted by material ejected from equator and orbital plane of system., ditto jets from young stars accretion disk at equator limits flows, similar jets from black holes with jets are constrained to be perpendicular to rotating accretion disk.
In all cases magnetic fields can help channel mass flow ie open filed lines at poles eg structure solar wind (see solar eclipse pictures at solar maximum.
 
K

KickLaBuka

Guest
would go against the most sucessful theory that has made precise predictions that we verify every day: General Relativity.
This is a bit off topic, but I would like to challenge General Relativity.

You better flesh out your theory a bit more before challenging Einstein and decades of observations.
I believe I have fleshed it out.

It has withstood the challenges of all competing theories, save one....... The sole exceptin is Einstein-Cartan theory
I would like to challenge it.

You hit it right, it is due to the interaction of the mass and a magnetic field.
You mean electromass? Magnetic fields can't occur without electric currents. They are one in the same. I challenge magnetohydrodynamics as a science as well as magnetic dys-connection while we're at it.
 
S

SpeedFreek

Guest
KickLaBuka":2bm1aqlq said:
This is a bit off topic, but I would like to challenge General Relativity.
Then challenge it in a more appropriate thread. :mrgreen:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts