• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Death Star Galaxy

Everyone knows the only Death-Star-looking astronomical object is Mimas:

Mimas_moon.jpg
 
Last edited:
From the article:

much like how a stream of water from a hose will splay out after hitting a wall at an angle.
Click to expand...

Notice how mainstream astrophysicists keep treating charged plasma like it is neutral gas ... making analogies to water and fluid flow and completely ignoring electromagnetic effects?

Notice this more complete report:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7148671.stm

It quotes Martin Hardcastle, co-author of the discovery, saying "There are still basic unanswered questions about how these jets work." "We don't know how exactly they're generated close to the black hole, what they're made of, how fast they're going, or how they evolve with time."

But I thought the Big Bang supporting mainstream had it all figured out. They and their proponents have certainly been dismissive of anyone who suggests they don't.

But it is a cool picture David.
 
BeAChooser said:
Notice how mainstream astrophysicists keep treating charged plasma like it is neutral gas ... making analogies to water and fluid flow and completely ignoring electromagnetic effects?
Click to expand...


No, science writers for the news treat charged plasma like it's a neutral gas, so that they can make analogies that lay people can understand. The actual astrophysicists take the charge characteristics of the plasma into account in their models.
 
Last edited:
tracer said:
The actual astrophysicists take the charge characteristics of the plasma into account in their models.
Click to expand...

Want to bet?

Here are some descriptions of their largest model yet.

http://www.physorg.com/news116170410.html "December 06, 2007, Supercomputer simulation of universe may help in search for missing matter ... snip ... Much of the gaseous mass of the universe is bound up in a tangled web of cosmic filaments that stretch for hundreds of millions of light-years, according to a new supercomputer study by a team led by the University of Colorado at Boulder."

Notice in that article that they don't refer to the material as plasma and they don't seem to recognize that electromagnetic effects naturally tend to organize plasmas into long filaments.

Continuing from the article:

"Professor Moffat adds, ‘If the multi-billion dollar laboratory experiments now underway succeed in directly detecting dark matter, then I will be happy to see Einsteinian and Newtonian gravity retained. However, if dark matter is not detected and we have to conclude that it does not exist ... "

All they talk about is gravity.

Continuing from the article:

"It took the researchers nearly a decade to produce the extraordinarily complex computer code that drove the simulation, which incorporated virtually all of the known physical conditions of the universe reaching back in time almost to the Big Bang, said Burns. The simulation -- which uses advanced numerical techniques to zoom-in on interesting structures in the universe -- modeled the motion of matter as it collapsed due to gravity and became dense enough to form cosmic filaments and galaxy structures."

Gravity gravity gravity.

Here are more sources on this from the same authors ...

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0610851 "AMR Simulations of the Cosmological Light Cone: SZE Surveys of the Synthetic Universe,
Eric J. Hallman (1), Brian W. O'Shea (2), Michael L. Norman (3), Rick Wagner (3), Jack O. Burns (1), ... snip ... (Submitted on 27 Oct 2006) We present preliminary results from simulated large sky coverage (~100 square degrees) Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect (SZE) cluster surveys using the cosmological adaptive mesh refinement N-body/hydro code Enzo. Download the PDF file from that link and read the article. Here is what it states about the method they are using: "The simulation used to generate the light cones described in this poster is of a 512 Mpc/h comoving volume of the universe, with the following cosmological parameters: ... snip ... . The simulation was initialized on a 512 3 root grid with 5123 dark matter particles, corresponding to a dark matter (baryon) mass resolution of 7.2 × 10 10 (1.1 ×10 10) M ?/h and an initial comoving spatial resolution of 1 Mpc/h. The simulation was then evolved to z=0 using a maximum of 4 levels of adaptive mesh refinement. This simulation results in a higher dynamic range than achieved by any previous AMR cosmological simulation representing such a large physical volume."

There is no mention of EM effects ... just gravity.

And here's a description of the code they are using and what is modeled:

http://www.sdsc.edu/News Items/PR081707_enzo.html "08.17.07 ... snip ... We need to zoom in on these dense regions to capture the key physical processes -- including gravitation, flows of normal and ‘dark’ matter, and shock heating and radiative cooling of the gas,' said Norman. 'This requires ENZO’s ‘adaptive mesh refinement’ capability.'"

And again you can see there is no mention of EM effects.

Here's a third source: http://www.nsf.gov/news/overviews/co...creensaver.jsp "This image shows the distribution of visible matter -- galaxies, quasars, and gas clouds -- inside a cube-shaped volume 248 million light-years on a side, the product of the world's most complex scientific simulation of the evolution of the universe ever performed. University of California, San Diego, cosmologist Michael Norman ran his Enzo program ... snip ... tracking more than a billion particles of visible matter and dark matter ... snip ... The simulation begins only 30 million years after the Big Bang, when the universe was a uniform sea of hydrogen and helium gas and dark matter. Over time, irregularities in density of about one part in a thousand are amplified by the action of gravity to form clusters of galaxies in enormous sheets and strings separated by immense voids."

Again, not one mention of electro-magnetic forces.

Still another source: http://www.sdsc.edu/us/sac/projects/enzo.html "We were able to use the Enzo code, developed for cosmological simulations of the early Universe, in an entirely new regime -- to model supersonic turbulence, the sort that prevails in molecular clouds throughout our own Milky Way galaxy and in many other situations," said Norman."

Sorry, but they are clearly modeling neutral gas and using methods more suited to studying supersonic flight than electromagnetic phenomena.

And even when mainstream astrophysicists do mention an electromagnetic phenomena, they only talk about magnetism and resort to all sorts of bogus theories involving frozen-in, tangled, open and reconnecting field lines. They never talk about electric currents and fields, and electromagnetic phenomena in plasma such as birkeland currents, double layers, exploding double layers and z-pinches.
 
BeAChooser said:
Notice how mainstream astrophysicists keep treating charged plasma like it is neutral gas ... making analogies to water and fluid flow and completely ignoring electromagnetic effects?
Click to expand...

"Fluid" does not mean liquid. Liquids are a subset of fluids, but "fluid" includes liquids, gases, and plasmas. Hell, it's even used to describe electrons inside metals. The use of the term in no way demands any comparison to water at all. You've got a lot to learn.
 
BeAChooser said:
Notice in that article that they don't refer to the material as plasma
Click to expand...

Because it's not plasma. Plasmas require very high temperatures, and you only get a lot of that with 1) stars and 2) the VERY early stages of the universe. Otherwise, electrons and nuclei (mostly just protons) combine to form gas. And gas is neutral, which means it will neither exert not respond to an electric or magnetic field. But (and here's the big surprise) it still produces and responds to gravity. Gee... why might gravity be the dominant force in the large-scale dynamics of gasses? Hmmm....

and they don't seem to recognize that electromagnetic effects naturally tend to organize plasmas into long filaments.
Click to expand...

That's nice. But what happens to plasma cannot explain what we see gas doing.

All they talk about is gravity.
Click to expand...

I wonder why that might be. Maybe because at those scales, it's the only significant force acting on gasses.

"08.17.07 ... snip ... We need to zoom in on these dense regions to capture the key physical processes -- including gravitation, flows of normal and ‘dark’ matter, and shock heating and radiative cooling of the gas,' said Norman. 'This requires ENZO’s ‘adaptive mesh refinement’ capability.'"

And again you can see there is no mention of EM effects.
Click to expand...

Umm... radiative cooling? That's actually an EM effect.

Sorry, but they are clearly modeling neutral gas and using methods more suited to studying supersonic flight than electromagnetic phenomena.
Click to expand...

Well gee, when you're modelling a gas and not a plasma, doesn't it kind of make sense to use methods for gasses and not for plasmas? And do you understand what the term "supersonic" means in this context? It's got nothing to do with flight as such.
 
Don't try to reason with BeACrackpot - it rolls off him like water of a quack's back. :)

I'm rather proud of that one, if I do say so myself... lack of sleep, probably.
 
Ziggurat said:
"Fluid" does not mean liquid. Liquids are a subset of fluids, but "fluid" includes liquids, gases, and plasmas.
Click to expand...

Well DUH. Did I say anywhere that "fluid" means "liquid". No.

Ziggurat said:
The use of the term in no way demands any comparison to water at all.
Click to expand...

Yet they did. Let me quote again from the thread's article:

much like how a stream of water from a hose will splay out after hitting a wall at an angle.
Click to expand...

Now try to show me ANYWHERE in the models that mainstream astrophysicists are using to describe production of jets, stars or the behavior of galaxies where they include such things as currents, electric fields, Birkeland currents, double layers or z-pinches. You probably can't do it.
 
Never mind that nowhere in any of those sources is there a single mention of anything that requires a charged plasma in order to be happening. Lots of gravity, though.
 
BeAChooser said:
Want to bet?

Here are some descriptions of their largest model yet.

http://www.physorg.com/news116170410.html "December 06, 2007, Supercomputer simulation of universe may help in search for missing matter ... snip ... Much of the gaseous mass of the universe is bound up in a tangled web of cosmic filaments that stretch for hundreds of millions of light-years, according to a new supercomputer study by a team led by the University of Colorado at Boulder."

Notice in that article that they don't refer to the material as plasma and they don't seem to recognize that electromagnetic effects naturally tend to organize plasmas into long filaments.

Continuing from the article:

"Professor Moffat adds, ‘If the multi-billion dollar laboratory experiments now underway succeed in directly detecting dark matter, then I will be happy to see Einsteinian and Newtonian gravity retained. However, if dark matter is not detected and we have to conclude that it does not exist ... "

All they talk about is gravity.

Continuing from the article:

"It took the researchers nearly a decade to produce the extraordinarily complex computer code that drove the simulation, which incorporated virtually all of the known physical conditions of the universe reaching back in time almost to the Big Bang, said Burns. The simulation -- which uses advanced numerical techniques to zoom-in on interesting structures in the universe -- modeled the motion of matter as it collapsed due to gravity and became dense enough to form cosmic filaments and galaxy structures."

Gravity gravity gravity.

Here are more sources on this from the same authors ...

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0610851 "AMR Simulations of the Cosmological Light Cone: SZE Surveys of the Synthetic Universe,
Eric J. Hallman (1), Brian W. O'Shea (2), Michael L. Norman (3), Rick Wagner (3), Jack O. Burns (1), ... snip ... (Submitted on 27 Oct 2006) We present preliminary results from simulated large sky coverage (~100 square degrees) Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect (SZE) cluster surveys using the cosmological adaptive mesh refinement N-body/hydro code Enzo. Download the PDF file from that link and read the article. Here is what it states about the method they are using: "The simulation used to generate the light cones described in this poster is of a 512 Mpc/h comoving volume of the universe, with the following cosmological parameters: ... snip ... . The simulation was initialized on a 512 3 root grid with 5123 dark matter particles, corresponding to a dark matter (baryon) mass resolution of 7.2 × 10 10 (1.1 ×10 10) M ?/h and an initial comoving spatial resolution of 1 Mpc/h. The simulation was then evolved to z=0 using a maximum of 4 levels of adaptive mesh refinement. This simulation results in a higher dynamic range than achieved by any previous AMR cosmological simulation representing such a large physical volume."

There is no mention of EM effects ... just gravity.

And here's a description of the code they are using and what is modeled:

http://www.sdsc.edu/News Items/PR081707_enzo.html "08.17.07 ... snip ... We need to zoom in on these dense regions to capture the key physical processes -- including gravitation, flows of normal and ‘dark’ matter, and shock heating and radiative cooling of the gas,' said Norman. 'This requires ENZO’s ‘adaptive mesh refinement’ capability.'"

And again you can see there is no mention of EM effects.

Here's a third source: http://www.nsf.gov/news/overviews/co...creensaver.jsp "This image shows the distribution of visible matter -- galaxies, quasars, and gas clouds -- inside a cube-shaped volume 248 million light-years on a side, the product of the world's most complex scientific simulation of the evolution of the universe ever performed. University of California, San Diego, cosmologist Michael Norman ran his Enzo program ... snip ... tracking more than a billion particles of visible matter and dark matter ... snip ... The simulation begins only 30 million years after the Big Bang, when the universe was a uniform sea of hydrogen and helium gas and dark matter. Over time, irregularities in density of about one part in a thousand are amplified by the action of gravity to form clusters of galaxies in enormous sheets and strings separated by immense voids."

Again, not one mention of electro-magnetic forces.

Still another source: http://www.sdsc.edu/us/sac/projects/enzo.html "We were able to use the Enzo code, developed for cosmological simulations of the early Universe, in an entirely new regime -- to model supersonic turbulence, the sort that prevails in molecular clouds throughout our own Milky Way galaxy and in many other situations," said Norman."

Sorry, but they are clearly modeling neutral gas and using methods more suited to studying supersonic flight than electromagnetic phenomena.

And even when mainstream astrophysicists do mention an electromagnetic phenomena, they only talk about magnetism and resort to all sorts of bogus theories involving frozen-in, tangled, open and reconnecting field lines. They never talk about electric currents and fields, and electromagnetic phenomena in plasma such as birkeland currents, double layers, exploding double layers and z-pinches.
Click to expand...

This is a repeat of another post in another thread.

Very close to spam BAC.
 
BeAChooser - Please only play in those threads that I don't read.

You irked me at 'hello'.
 
Ziggurat said:
Because it's not plasma. Plasmas require very high temperatures, and you only get a lot of that with 1) stars and 2) the VERY early stages of the universe. Otherwise, electrons and nuclei (mostly just protons) combine to form gas. And gas is neutral, which means it will neither exert not respond to an electric or magnetic field. But (and here's the big surprise) it still produces and responds to gravity. Gee... why might gravity be the dominant force in the large-scale dynamics of gasses? Hmmm....



That's nice. But what happens to plasma cannot explain what we see gas doing.



I wonder why that might be. Maybe because at those scales, it's the only significant force acting on gasses.



Umm... radiative cooling? That's actually an EM effect.



Well gee, when you're modelling a gas and not a plasma, doesn't it kind of make sense to use methods for gasses and not for plasmas? And do you understand what the term "supersonic" means in this context? It's got nothing to do with flight as such.
Click to expand...

Ziggy, BAC assumes that all the universe is plasma. He defines it that way, he refuses to discuss with people, he insists that every thing in the universe is plasma and that these huge EM currents flow through space, he is some sort of follower of Arp and Scott. The plasma cosmology is much cooler than the electric sun.

He will accuse you of being part of the BBE conspiracy to supress, ignore and deny funding to his private desires.
 
Schneibster said:
Never mind that nowhere in any of those sources is there a single mention of anything that requires a charged plasma in order to be happening. Lots of gravity, though.
Click to expand...

That is his point, he mixes plasma cosmology with the electric sun. He beleives that the BBE theory is about to collapse and is only existing due to the duplicity and willing suppression of his pet theories. So he is upset that someone is modeling the universe without assuming that everything is plasma.
 
BeAChooser said:
Well DUH. Did I say anywhere that "fluid" means "liquid". No.



Yet they did. Let me quote again from the thread's article:



Now try to show me ANYWHERE in the models that mainstream astrophysicists are using to describe production of jets, stars or the behavior of galaxies where they include such things as currents, electric fields, Birkeland currents, double layers or z-pinches. You probably can't do it.
Click to expand...


Beware BAC, Ziggy is one of the people who does understand the math and the physics, so be sure that you really undersatnd the stuff you sling around. If it is bogus, the underlying mistakes will be shown.
 
A recent tour of BAC

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100935

In this one , in the final page he is discussing an alternative solution to general relativity. (He likes the plasma steady state universe).

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=99727

An introduction to Thunderbolts and a brief tour of BACs thoughts.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90595

The Motherlode also staring TVFrank's four questions

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90595
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom