Right Handed Spiral Galaxies are Preferred

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by danshawen, Nov 8, 2015.

  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    You have laid claim to the forum clown in your own words.
    I'm just enjoying your nonsensical Bollywood style acting.
    ps: I don't really believe even Schmelzer could lower his standards enough to support you, despite your usual grabbing of apron strings.
    Why are you so afraid of links my boy?
    Because they tend to undermine your nonsense?
    Those links will continue indefinitley as long as needed.
    They ended up chasing rajesh off in some shame, and are just as assuredly highlighting your own short comings.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Whatever.
    [1] You most certainly at best stupidly took my comment out of context.
    [2] And you certainly have an agenda and are using the questions in this thread to again, raise that agenda from the dead.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    What is this ? You know I need no strings; But you are completely tantacled in the mainstreams strings.
    BTW I find string theory also as total waste of enormous time, funds and energy. [not seeking any copy paste on that, pl]
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    This thread was going along nicely until your half disguised lying accusation post at 20. Typical for you in the sewer though and another illustration of your lies.
     
  8. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    You could have given reference about those 4-5 questions or you could have stated that they were yours.

    Instead of that you went ahead with abuses all around....you are spitting abuses on anybody who dares speak anything which you feel is away from mainstream.....
     
  9. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    Some folks seem to have a problem thinking BIG. If you think of the BB/inflation as something like the equivalent of a supernova event, but on a larger scale, then:

    If the Big Bang and inflation created our universe, there is really no reason to expect it could not do the same thing billions of times on scales much more distant than 13.7 light years in adjusted relativistic time.

    Similar to what occurs on smaller scales, these billions of other universes would probably need to rotate around something that is much larger in order to keep from falling directly into it, or into each other. As with what we have observed in this small universe, the larger the distance scale, the less likely it is that something will collide with something else that is distant by means of gravitational attraction. There is almost always some rotation imparted on the way to such collisions to conserve angular momentum and to prevent large scale collisions. Even when there are collisions on the scale of galaxies, there is usually sufficient empty spaces between stars to mitigate most direct collisions.

    And note too that the larger the scale, the faster the relativistic velocities involved. THIS is the principle reason that rotational Doppler shifts would be indistinguishable from translational ones on the largest scales.

    I will stipulate that COBE, WMAP and Planck data all appear very isotropic, which does not suggest rotation at all. But be could simply be rotating along with everything else, and there is no real assurance that this would cause an anisotropy related to an axis of rotation of any kind. The axis of rotation could simply be impossibly distant from everything we can, on a practical level, observe.

    In this model, both steady state (on extreme large scales) and inflationary models (on the scale of the known universe) exist side by side without contradiction. It still makes more sense than a multiverse. There is no reason for energy to be conserved in a multiverse.

    If this were remotely true, in some distant aeons upon aeons, we could actually observe inflation unfold somewhere far too distant for anything in our universe to ever reach. Would we even understand what it was we were observing?

    One more observation before leaving this thread to dangle; would not a collision between a right handed galaxy and a left handed galaxy result in both more and more energetic stellar collisions than if the colliding galaxies were spinning in the same direction?

    Is the Andromeda galaxy spinning in a direction that is the same or 'flipped' relative to the Milky Way?
     
  10. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Yes, and everyone, if their head and neck are horizontal, instead of vertical as you spin*, only for a couple of minutes. It is highly probable that you will have difficulty to walk for a minute or so after you stop and stand vertical.

    The easiest way to experience this is with a baseball bat, vertical on the ground and your head resting on its top as you rotate arround the bat, say 10 times. Try it and you will be amazed by the strength of the effect.

    Without the baseball bat to keep you standing, you will probably fall down before completing three full 360 turns. I.e. spinning your lower torso with the top half (head and neck) horizontal is going to make you quickly fall.

    * If you have trouble with seeing this as "spinning" note that when half way around the bat, your hips have turned (spun) 180 degrees. I. e. It is a relatively slow rate of spinning, which makes the strength of the effect all the more amazing.

    The little otalifs (not spelled correctly) stones in your ear's three semi-circular canals, have never been distrubed this way before. Brain does not know how to process these new, "crazy" signals they are sending it.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2015
  11. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Locally yes. There is net angular momentum in the solar syatem - all planets go same way around the sun and with a few exceptions, probably caused by large prior collisions their rotatation, and that of their moons have angular monentum in the same general direction. The total is just what the gas cloud had- it all came from the cloud's.
     
  12. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    The big bang was nothing like a supernova. A supernova is an explosion in space and the big bang is the expansion of space.

    What are you talking about? Time is not distance.

    What are you talking about? How could one universe orbit another. Outside of the universe there is no space or time, so how could 'one universe' orbit 'another universe'? Are you saying a gravitational field does not require space or time to propagate?

    You seem to be implying that galaxies that are far from earth with a high recession velocity also have a large time dilation relative to earth, but since the recession velocity is NOT a velocity through space there is not time dilation.
     
  13. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,003
    There are differences, but what you think is not the difference. First, the supernova is essentially an implosion, a collapse. And, because this collapse is far away from being an ideal symmetric one, there is a lot of bouncing, which makes it look like an explosion.

    The implosion itself could be symmetric. And this symmetric part of the implosion is, in fact, very similar to the time-reversed big bang. All you need in this case is a restriction - you should exclude the parts which are outside, close to the surface of the star, and restrict yourself to the part which is inside - so far inside that the distance to the surface no longer matters, and does not make the situation anisotropic.

    So, deep enough inside, the implosion of the supernovae looks very similar to a time-reverted big bang.

    This requires an identification of some preferred space position. Thus, it is in contradiction with the mainstream spacetime interpretation, which does not allow to make such a difference. "No velocity through space" is, clearly, another word for absolute rest.

    Once you accept that this is something different from the mainstream, and that absolute rest is, indeed, something which makes sense, then the question appears how to identify what is at absolute rest. And in this case your hypothesis is a quite natural one: All the galaxies, however far away, may be at rest. And it is not the movement of the galaxies, but a shrinking of the rulers, which leads to redshift.
     
  14. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    I wasn't suggesting that inflation "was" anything like a supernova event. I was only scaling down inflation as it might have been viewed from very far outside of it.

    This keeps coming up again and again. Do you not remember (or simply not read what I wrote), the NIST standard of DISTANCE is light travel TIME?

    A light YEAR to us is the DISTANCE light can travel in the same TIME it takes the Earth to complete one rotation about the Sun. There may be relativistic frames of reference that are going so fast relative to us and so close to the speed of light that in the 13.7 billion years since inflation began, only ONE SECOND of adjusted time has elapsed. Sorry, I didn't realize that I had left you so far behind. It's all there in Einstein's equations. I'm not making any of this up.

    When it turned out that acceleration increased with increasing cosmological distance, as we now know it does, this sort of hypothetical hyper-relativistic frame of reference becomes possible, given sufficient time for the expanding matter of our universe to continue the trend. You don't need to convert E=mc^2 of the expanding matter to pure energy in order for it to achieve such insane relative velocities. The universe does the acceleration for us. A wild ride. I don't know if it is spinning or not. Maybe it doesn't really matter.

    Please, just forget the rest of my post and read something you can understand.

    Even Billy T is dizzy.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2015
  15. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    The throwing off of the outer layers of the star is what I assumed the poster was referring to. If he was saying the expansion of the universe is like an implosion that wouldn't make much sense, would it? Sure, he may have meant that, "the big bang is exactly like a supernova only completely different", but he did not say anything like that.

    I was in no way even implying that there is absolute rest or a preferred position. I clearly stated that:
    "recession velocity is NOT a velocity through space"
    I never said that the galaxies were not traveling through space, please do not attribute things to me that I did not say.
     
  16. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    OK, so you are saying a supernova was nothing like the big bang, but it was kind of like it.
    Got it.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Ok. let's keep it real simple.
    Light year - a distance measurement
    Year - a time measurement.

    Actually, we don't know this since it is not accurate. The acceleration of the expansion of the universe does not increase the farther back in time we go. The acceleration of the expansion is a relatively recent phenomena.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  17. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    And for the record, I actually didn't know that Michael Longo's original research referred to in the OP had been so "picked apart" by mainstream cosmologists. It still appears to be a perfectly valid mode of scientific inquiry to me. Not Ptolemaic enough, is my guess.
     
  18. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    No it does not and I am not dizzy. The accelertion of the universe expansion is increasing with TIME not "with increasing cosmological distance". Quite probably at about the same rate every where at the same time, but that AFAIK is not a known fact. It may be faster where "dark energy" is more concentrated, as that seems to be doing the anti-gravity pushing.

    This is second time in this thread I have needed to correct your false statements. First was your failure to understand that all objects are rotating both CW & CCW - Which you view just depends upon from which side of the plane of rotation your view the object from.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  19. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Symmetric or asymmetric, origin is far more correct than you Schmelzer.
    Or perhaps you were trying to be overly pedantic?
    In actual fact any star large enough will undergo gravitational collapse which reaches a stage where through nucleosynthesis the core becomes so dense [nickel/Iron] that it causes the bulk of the remaining outer layers to rebound and explode in what we call a S/N explosion. That briefly describes a type 11 S/N. In other words the gravitational collapse causes the S/N explosion, leaving a Neutron star core.
    The other may occur in a binary system where one of the stars is a White Dwarf, which pulls of matter from its companion star, until it reaches a stage where more fusion is initiated and the WD explodes. This is a type 1a S/N.
     
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    I see you as correct except for one issue. The DE component I believe is a constant force of spacetime, so is equal everywhere.
    This is why we are now accelerating in that expansion rate. As the universe/spacetime expands, the gravity from the mass/energy situated in the Universe/spacetime, grows less and less over large scales, while the DE component remains a consistent force of spacetime itself.
     
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    I have argued that exact point before, but it needs to be remembered that it is speculative. If our BB arose out of some fluctuation in the quantum foam, there is certainly no reason why other Universes could not arise the same way.
    Perhaps many millions of fluctuations take place...some arising and recollapsing...
    Bingo! The solar system, the galaxy, other galaxies, all have flattened disk like shapes that is caused by angular momentum. The Universe of course is another matter.
     
  22. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    The original researcher (Longo) understood what you are saying about galactic handedness. He probably should have called them "heads or tails". He was simply looking for a bias. I do understand your point.
     
  23. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    Time and increasing cosmological distance (measured in light years -- 13.7 billion light years for the known universe to be exact) are the same. We estimate the universe to be 13.7 billion years old because the most distant object we are able to observe is 13.7 billion light years distant from us.

    F=ma. For as long as a force acts, the something it acts on accelerates.
     

Share This Page