Plasma Cosmology

[Vkothii]

Once I determined that NO non-rotaing Black Holes existed, and therefore the Schwarzschild "Point Singularity" Doesn't Exist

I've always wondered about black holes that rotate, or rather have angular momentum.
What is actually rotating, in the case of a rotating black hole?

We can't see a thing except for an event horizon, and below that there isn't anything we can describe as matter, instead time and distance are inverted, or alternately the rotation occurs in time but not distance (the EH appears "frozen" and looks like a stationary area, over any time-integrated part of its surface). So what happens if you integrate over distance, in terms of "time area"?

 

[Bishadi]

AlphaNumeric's No-Go therums

if that is THE Alpha Numeric

then i see why you are confused

but this is priceless

As far as that goes....God can never be removed....period.

BUT, that defines Nothing!!!

For Science, and understanding 'how the universe is working'...that is "Cause and Effect

Have you ever heard of the trinity? (all Mass, all energy, all time)

or it is basically 'existence' itself within which we (life) exist

and as the conscious species, define God with words/math. We are God's children (within existence) just as they used to tells us; but never separate.

well that final script combining the three (MET) is that long sought 'name of God'

and then if you like to read; find all them religions been talking about 'light' since the beginning of choice (Adams apple story)

all the religions mention the 'light is life' kind of stuff

well that is what the final TOE reveals; light is the energy upon mass

and then to know the properties of light such as entanglement, then gravity is no longer a phenomenon

the whole game combines under ONE frame......mr endlightend.......

can you see it now :shrug: or do you need a light?

 

[Reiku]

OK.... take 10 Hydrogen atoms and then take away 10 electrons; you have plasma



Then take 1 H atom, and take away 1 electron; you have plasma


what are you trying to say about 4th state?

It's a fourth state because it is unlike the three states of matter we are used to working with, solid, liquid and gas.

 

[Reiku]

NO, they do not have a clue as to how galaxies are formed!!!

http://www.narrabri.atnf.csiro.au/public/images/ngc2915/

This is "First Light" in a New Galaxy!!!

Why, because they do NOT have a clue as to how SMBH's are created!

Alfven will have his day, BUT, PC as a Hot Global/universe beginning is NOT the answer.

How "Space gets here" is the key, and it is NOT from a Naked Singualrity expanding!!!

What "Space" is made of is the key....Space is "Absolute" traveling at "c" in ALL directions, going right through your bodies, the earth, the stars, going right through ALL baryonic matter.

When a SMBH is created, that is where the High Energy Gamma Radiation makes the electrons/protons...making a New Galaxy.........Long GRB's, 3 seconds to 500 seconds, make dwarf galaxies and regular spiral galaxies.

That is where and when the Plasma comes into play@

Supermassive black holes might have something to do with the formations we observe.

 

[Bishadi]

It's a fourth state because it is unlike the three states of matter we are used to working with, solid, liquid and gas.

so state what that state is for ONE hydrogen atom.....

let me guess one must be double jointed in the back to see that black hole?

and not the one that winks but the one that stinks


and for the heavy weights it may be supermassive..... sometimes referred to as the beast to the porcelin thrown; AAAAAAAmmmmmeeeeennnnn!

then don't forget to do the sign of the cross in front of yourself and chant;

hey a, you a wops, get offa da lawn

just like the pope is saying in rome

 

[Reiku]

huh?

 

[kaneda]

I've always wondered about black holes that rotate, or rather have angular momentum.
What is actually rotating, in the case of a rotating black hole?

The core of the black hole is rotating. All large/dense bodies in space rotate (unless gravitationally locked). My idea is that they are falling towards their own centre in an unknown direction which we see as rotation. I think that is what we call gravitational pull.

 

[EndLightEnd]

but we all know, that no plasma strings of energy are conveying in between the galaxies.

Yea well guess what, 2000 years ago we ALL KNEW the earth was flat. Weak argument, lets see if you can stop yourself from using it again.

 

[Oli]

Yea well guess what, 2000 years ago we ALL KNEW the earth was flat.

Wrong.
New weak argument?

 

[Vkothii]

The core of the black hole is rotating.

When you say: "rotating", what is rotating? What does the core look like, how does it rotate with respect to time, or its surface area? What does it rotate around?

 

[EndLightEnd]

“ Originally Posted by RussT
http://www.narrabri.atnf.csiro.au/pu...mages/ngc2915/
This is "First Light" in a New Galaxy!!! ”

Although I had never considered GRB to be the births of galaxies, it makes sense because these events release more energy contained in a galaxy in a very short time! Current astronomy would have us believe a single blackhole (or neutron star) is responsible for this. But there is WAY to much energy there, and they are always happening extra-galactic.
So if space is literally being created in SMBH as you propose, how far does this extend distance wise? Is the gap between galaxies NOT filled with space?

I am the first one that has shown as "Cause/Effect" that Long GRB's 3 to 500 seconds, are caused by the forming of Massive Black Holes, to form a New Galaxy...Something that Hoyle was looking for his entire life!

What are the shorter bursts a result of?

I already figured out that the SMBH's creation was where the High Energy Gamma Radiation was taking place, to make the electrons/protons for each new galaxy "Individually", then there was NO "Hot Beginning"

Im not sure what you mean by this. I think what your trying to say is that after the initial GRB, things start to cool down and change from radiation to form matter, right?

Are you aware of a connection between chain galaxy formations? If so do you know how that works?

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying! When you work out what you would see "Before the first light", like I suggested, I'll go into more detail about what would be 'observed', as the core gets bigger and bigger and when the 'arms' start their star formation, and why we can't actually see it as it is happening.

Please continue on this subject as well. I know that star formation in the arms is a self-propagating process. Once you start formation ANYWHERE on the arm it will spread like wildfire. How does this tie into your idea?

Sure it does, and this happening here, tells me numerous things about how and why the Standard Model got totally off track, But, let's not get bogged down at the quantum level here, until we get the macro 'initial conditions' well covered! That is one of the things that has screwed the whole thing up in the first place!!!

I would also agree that our current view of the universe is WAY off, I am trying to reach understanding.
But then I meet people like bishandi who seem only to want ignorance of new knowledge, and attack un-like minded people.

 

[EndLightEnd]

Wrong.
New weak argument?

Oh wait your right. There was NEVER a point in history when we thought the Earth was flat.
Our history books are lying again!:shrug:

Please unless your going to talk about plasma cosmology, stay off this thread. I know its hard for you to NOT push your reality onto others, but please try.

 

[Oli]

Oh wait your right. There was NEVER a point in history when we thought the Earth was flat. Our history books are lying again!:shrug:

Mostly they do.
However your statement that we ALL knew the Earth was flat ignores what you should have been taught about the Greeks (among others) working out that it was spehrical... Eratosthenes got a figure for sphericity to about 5-10% of the actual figure. (And the date was around 200 BC).

Edit

Please unless your going to talk about plasma cosmology, stay off this thread. I know its hard for you to NOT push your reality onto others, but please try.

I'll jump in whenever I see someone posting facile and incorrect "supporting data".
Push MY REALITY?
I'm not inventing "facts" to back me up.
It is to laugh...

 

[RussT]

“ Originally Posted by RussT
“ Originally Posted by RussT
http://www.narrabri.atnf.csiro.au/pu...mages/ngc2915/
This is "First Light" in a New Galaxy!!! ” ”

Although I had never considered GRB to be the births of galaxies, it makes sense because these events release more energy contained in a galaxy in a very short time!

Yes...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2001/deathstartrans.shtml

BBC Death Star
STAN WOOSLEY: If you took all of the stars in all of the galaxies and all of the quasars and everything in the Universe and put them all together at one point at the distance of a gamma ray burst it would not be as bright as the gamma ray burst.

SN1a's outshine the one galaxy that they are in, and SNII's are less bright than 1a's.
SN 2008gy is outshining approximately 100 galaxies, and is being touted as 'The Brightest SN ever................SO, how can a single Star, 10+ billion light years distant, Outshine the entire universe including ALL Quasars.........I got just one word for ya all.........Impossible!!!

Now, for 30 + years (1963 to 1973), mainstream was "Sure" that GRB's "Had" to be IN the Milky Way Galaxy, Othewise the "Energy Output" would "Break E=mc^2". After 30+ years of being "Wrong", once a Paczynski showed that GRB's were 'all sky'/extra-galactic, (1997 when the first afterglow was found...he started plotting the sky positions in '92 and it took 5 years to get enough to show that they were NOT in the Plane of the Milky Way....vindicated in 5 short years, very unusally in astronomy!!!) they were still breaking E=mc^2, IF the were "Isotropic". Enter Sir Martin Rees...

NOW, they "Assumed" 2 things here...1. That these "Had to be stars" and 2. That they "Must be IN galaxies".

I used to agrue that they were NOt 'Beamed', and that they were Isotropic. BUT, the "Jets"/Beams from GRB's are the "First time the "Jets" of a SMBH come on....the "Second Time" those "Jets" come on is when enough baryonic matter has accumulated in the accretion disc, when the become Seyfert Galaxies, when the "Bulge" has become big enough, and those jets become bigger and stronger, as they progress to the Elliptical Galaxy stage, where they stay on as Quasars and Blasars, where the Quasars are not pointed directly at us, and the Blasars are pointed directly at us!

Current astronomy would have us believe a single black hole (or neutron star) is responsible for this.[/QOUTE]

You have to be very careful here! A single Black Hole IS responsible...A SMBH........Not a Huge Star/Hypernova black hole...

But there is WAY to much energy there, and they are always happening extra-galactic.

Yes, defintely! BUT, here "extra-Galactic" doesn't just mean outside the Milky Way, BUT outside of ANY galaxy what-so-ever. Actually, they (Long GRB's 3 to 500 seconds) are "Exploding", creating the SMBH and the High Energy Gamma Radiation, at the edge of Voids. Then those "New Galaxies", that are made one at a time, are "Falling" into their particular clusters.

So if space is literally being created in SMBH as you propose, how far does this extend distance wise? Is the gap between galaxies NOT filled with space?

This is a natural mistake/misunderstanding to make here.

Yes, the gap between galaxies IS filled with space!!! The 'extent' of the SMBH in the core of galaxies has nothing to do with making space...For Our Universe.

When Our "Space" 'goes down' Our SMBH's, the 'space' goes to the Universe level below Our Universe, and makes "Their Space". Each SMBH in our Universe "IS connected" (E-R Bridge) to a "Void between a galaxy cluster" in the Universe below Ours....AND Spews out 'space' for them.....ALL of those Voids "Spew Out Neutrinos" in straight line motion to infinity. ALL of those Voids wind up 'spewing neutrinos' in ALL/Every Direction at the speed of light "c"....That IS expanding Space to infinity in all directions, with the universe NEVER SHRUNK DOWN TO ANY SMALL SIZE!!!

SO, the Same thing happens for OUR universe....The Universe level "Above Our Universe", has SMBH's that E=R Bridge Connect to OUR VOIDS, and Spew Neutrinos at "c", in every/all directions.


“ Originally Posted by RussT
I am the first one that has shown as "Cause/Effect" that Long GRB's 3 to 500 seconds, are caused by the forming of Massive Black Holes, to form a New Galaxy...Something that Hoyle was looking for his entire life! ”

What are the shorter bursts a result of?

The short GRB's Milli-seconds to 2 seconds are Neutron star/stellar black hole related. They have had a very difficult time finding any aftergows for these, and only 1 or 2 possibles have even been identified.


Originally Posted by RussT
I already figured out that the SMBH's creation was where the High Energy Gamma Radiation was taking place, to make the electrons/protons for each new galaxy "Individually", then there was NO "Hot Beginning" ”

Im not sure what you mean by this. I think what your trying to say is that after the initial GRB, things start to cool down and change from radiation to form matter, right?

:bravo::bravo:

Yes, when the Long 3 to 500 second GRB Afterglows "Fade" to darkness, that is the same process that the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis for Hydrogen/Helium to cool and form.

SO, when the GRB's "fade"...How Long it takes to form these, is what needs to be studied correctly...

http://kencroswell.com/FirstDarkGalaxy.html

Currently there is NO WAY to tell if these are even LSB's (Low Surface Bright) Galaxies even have SMBH's, BUT I guarantee that they DO...

I have GOT to eat something....More later...

 

[EndLightEnd]

“ Originally Posted by RussT
“ Originally Posted by RussT
http://www.narrabri.atnf.csiro.au/pu...mages/ngc2915/
This is "First Light" in a New Galaxy!!! ”

Link is Broke.

SN 2008gy is outshining approximately 100 galaxies, and is being touted as 'The Brightest SN ever................SO, how can a single Star, 10+ billion light years distant, Outshine the entire universe including ALL Quasars.........I got just one word for ya all.........Impossible!!!

Outshining as in currently happening? Do you have a link?

I used to agrue that they were NOt 'Beamed', and that they were Isotropic. BUT, the "Jets"/Beams from GRB's are the "First time the "Jets" of a SMBH come on....the "Second Time" those "Jets" come on is when enough baryonic matter has accumulated in the accretion disc, when the become Seyfert Galaxies, when the "Bulge" has become big enough, and those jets become bigger and stronger, as they progress to the Elliptical Galaxy stage, where they stay on as Quasars and Blasars, where the Quasars are not pointed directly at us, and the Blasars are pointed directly at us!

So instead of elliptical->spiral, your saying spiral->elliptical. Which is the way it should have been if galaxy morphology was done by the age of the stars instead of how it looked. No wonder they cant figure out why ellipticals have older stars in them.

Yes, defintely! BUT, here "extra-Galactic" doesn't just mean outside the Milky Way, BUT outside of ANY galaxy what-so-ever. Actually, they (Long GRB's 3 to 500 seconds) are "Exploding", creating the SMBH and the High Energy Gamma Radiation, at the edge of Voids. Then those "New Galaxies", that are made one at a time, are "Falling" into their particular clusters.

This is new information to me. Ive always been told these events are happening outside our galaxy, but always inside OTHER galaxies. Kind of makes you a little angry.

I am the first one that has shown as "Cause/Effect" that Long GRB's 3 to 500 seconds, are caused by the forming of Massive Black Holes, to form a New Galaxy...Something that Hoyle was looking for his entire life!

Is there somewhere I can read about this?

Yes, when the Long 3 to 500 second GRB Afterglows "Fade" to darkness, that is the same process that the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis for Hydrogen/Helium to cool and form.

So its sorta a mini big bang. Whats the initial cause?

Currently there is NO WAY to tell if these are even LSB's (Low Surface Bright) Galaxies even have SMBH's, BUT I guarantee that they DO...

The article was saying the dark galaxy is only about half the diameter. So your also suggesting that galaxies grow as they evolve eventually becoming ellipticals?

 

[Bishadi]

Yea well guess what, 2000 years ago we ALL KNEW the earth was flat. Weak argument, lets see if you can stop yourself from using it again.

this is the kind of stuff that shares how bad it has become.....

anyone who could actually believe that Plasma cosmology is correct is simply ignorant.

it is like a religious person thinking god created existence, based on the words created by mankind

to comprehend an exchange of energy between mass, at the micro scale and life itself, will and does reveal far more than a bunch of monkeys trying to build a simulation based on material that does not reveal itself as even there..

There is no such thing as black holes other than within the brains of the complacent too lazy to actually comprehend what they are saying.

I will bet on this terminal i sit at is more material on specifics of math on PC, than what most have read in the last year on every subject combined.

Point being is if you really wanted to go over specifics, it is easy but since integrity is not the rule of the majority on this thread, then no wonder, the circle jerk continues.....

 

[RussT]

if that is THE Alpha Numeric

then i see why you are confused

but this is priceless



Have you ever heard of the trinity? (all Mass, all energy, all time)

or it is basically 'existence' itself within which we (life) exist

and as the conscious species, define God with words/math. We are God's children (within existence) just as they used to tells us; but never separate.

well that final script combining the three (MET) is that long sought 'name of God'

and then if you like to read; find all them religions been talking about 'light' since the beginning of choice (Adams apple story)

all the religions mention the 'light is life' kind of stuff

well that is what the final TOE reveals; light is the energy upon mass

and then to know the properties of light such as entanglement, then gravity is no longer a phenomenon

the whole game combines under ONE frame......mr endlightend.......

can you see it now :shrug: or do you need a light?

Bishadi, we have bumped heads before...On BAUT.

You continually 'Flavor' (and I'm being polite here) your posts with religous and political whatevers, and you think that 'Matter' is created from "Zero Point Energy" ZPE, which it defintely NOT...Virtual particles Nor ZPE creating particles at that energy level cannot happen. Zero Point Energy is the CMB, and it takes High Energy Gamma radiation Events (Long GRB's 3 to 500 seconds) to cause the "Binding Energy" (Strong Force) to be able to create electrons and protons!

I know you are knowledgable in Chemistry, and there is definitely a huge disconnect in the Standard Model of particle physics, so you may have discovered something that appears to be right to you, BUT...

The Universe is working as an "Open System", not a closed one, so ALL of the laws of physics are opposite of what has been developed, SO energy is NOT conserved, and everything must be re-mathametized, from first principles.

 

[RussT]

Dupe post.

 

[Bishadi]

Bishadi, we have bumped heads before...On BAUT.

could be but below seems you have me mixed up with someone else

You continually 'Flavor' (and I'm being polite here) your posts with religous and political whatevers, and you think that 'Matter' is created from "Zero Point Energy" ZPE,

Not me

mass is energy affixed in time

Virtual particles Nor ZPE creating particles at that energy level cannot happen.

Particles are not fixed point of mass. There are no particles

Zero Point Energy is the CMB, and it takes High Energy Gamma radiation Events (Long GRB's 3 to 500 seconds) to cause the "Binding Energy" (Strong Force) to be able to create electrons and protons!

Protons are simply a portion of an event; not building blocks.

I know you are knowledgable in Chemistry, and there is definitely a huge disconnect in the Standard Model of particle physics, so you may have discovered something that appears to be right to you, BUT...

no butts.... we all have them and most (if not all ) stink

The Universe is working as an "Open System", not a closed one,

Then you believe entropy is not a law of equilibrium? (single direction)

ALL of the laws of physics are opposite of what has been developed, SO energy is NOT conserved, and everything must be re-mathametized, from first principles.

not bad

plancks constant is wrong

and if you assist these kids on understanding this, then maybe we could start up them first principles for these puppy's and let them run with a proper foundation.


Russ T, here as well in BAUT..... i am not in this for me

all i care about is that the evolution of knowledge continues and since the kids are who will run this taco stand after we are gone

so to give them an opportunity well ahead of the ignorance of today's paradigm

they can torchure their teachers with material, questions and understanding that cannot be denied

the only reason i hate this plasma garbage is that it is much of just the same; garbage


we can learn the lessons from Alfven but please; that frame is incorrect

you an i both know; existence only opperates in one fashion

 

[EndLightEnd]

and if you assist these kids on understanding this, then maybe we could start up them first principles for these puppy's and let them run with a proper foundation.

What is the proper foundation?