Science and Technology news... :: View topic

oldcoot · Guest

On Jul 30, 5:29 pm, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com>
wrote:
[quote]
Rats, I misplaced that cool graph I found earlier today. The horizontal
axis shows distance from the galactic center; the vertical axis shows
tangential velocity. If the galaxy was a solid disk, you>d see
increasing speed with distance from the center. If the stars were of
negligible mass and followed strictly newtonian orbits around a massive
central object, then you>d see decreasing speed with distance from the
center. But the galaxy is neither of those. The stars themselves have
mass, but they>re not a solid disk, so something in between is expected.
indeed, the curve increases from zero (though with recent measurements,
that should change) and then flattens to a mostly straight line.

With emphasis on this point :

It is **that line** which has caused all the trouble and hubbub about dark
matter.

Yeah. The matter of "dark matter" has been discussed at length here[/quote]
many times prior to your arrival on the scene. The argument for DM is
not "all" about galactic rotation curves. Another prong of the
argument for DM is the excessive lensing of distant galaxies, lensing
in excess of what 'normal' matter can account for.. based on the
current understanding of gravity.

But under the flowing space (FS) model of gravity, the argument for DM
falls apart in explaining excessive lensing. As discussed many times,
gravity is the effect of and _only of_ the *acceleration component* of
a spatial flow (as in a gravity well). Momentum is imparted to matter
*only* by the acceleration component of the flow. No acceleration = no
"curvature of space" = no gravity *irrespective of the actual velocity
of the flow*. But light, being massless, is deflected (lensed) in
traversing *any* flow whether the flow is accelerating or not. Thus
any large scale, non-accelerating flows of the intergalactic medium
are gonna lens light just as is observed. It is simple *flow lensing*,
not "gravitational" lensing. No exotic explanations like "dark matter"
needed.
But back to the rotation curves of galaxies. In
contrast to the solar system which has 99% of its mass concentrated in
the center and hence displays Keplerian rotation, the typical spiral
galaxy has a far higher percentage of its mass distributed
peripherally, out in the spiral arms and dust lanes. *Mutual
gravitation* of this outlying mass is gonna account for a goodly part
of the galaxy>s non-Keplarian rotation. "Dark matter" begins looking
more and more like a solution without a problem.

But under the sitting paradigm of space as a 'void-nothing', there is
nothing resembling the explanation of the _causal mechanism_ of
gravity, nothing to flow, and nothing to explain excessive lensing of
distant galaxies.. except "dark matter".

Painius · Guest

"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote in...
message
news:timberwoof.spam-955671.14495630072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
[quote]In article
2w2kk.276210$SV4.168483@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com> wrote:
"G=EMC^2 Glazier" <herbertglazier@webtv.net> wrote...
in message news:17438-48909A79-75@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net...

Painius I find that very interesting that are galaxy is revolving in
the opposite direction our Sun is taking us through it. I need two
questions answers How fast is the Milky Way revolving,and how much
does
this shorten the time for us to make a full swing around inside of it?
Bert

Whoa! Hold up! Back up ten yards and punt, friend
Bert!...

The Sun is taking us through the galaxy in the same
general direction of the galaxy>s spin/rotation! It>s
the direction of the orbits of all the planets, including
Earth, AROUND THE SUN that is opposite to the
direction the galaxy is rotating.

If you were to hike all the way up to the North Pole,
and then stand right there on the pole and look up,
you would be staring straight at the star Polaris. And
you would also be looking out the South side of the
Milky Way galaxy>s disk.

So whenever you see the standard picture of our
galaxy, such as...

http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/galaxy.html

...the Sun and planets are moving to the right (in
the direction toward the constellation Cygnus), the
galaxy is rotating in a clockwise direction, and the
galaxy>s North pole is DOWN.

Well, off at some walpyjod angle, anyway.
http://star-www.st-and.ac.uk/~fv/webnotes/chapter8.htm
[/quote]
Either 117° or 63° depending on whether you use the
right-hand rule or the IAU convention. If the standard
right-hand rule is used, then what i wrote above does
apply. But if one uses the IAU convention then it all
flips over. According to the IAU, North Pole of the Earth
is on the same side of the galactic disk as the North
pole of the galaxy. So then the North Celestial Pole
would be 63° off from the Galactic North Pole.

OTOH, when the right-hand rule is used, you hold your
hand in a natural position with fingers curved. When
your fingers point in the direction of galactic disk
rotation, then your thumb points toward North. In this
case, Earth>s North Pole would be 117° (over 90°) off
from the Galactic North Pole.

As astronomers might say, pick one and stick to it. I
guess it>s not a big deal and doesn>t matter much as
long as everybody>s "on the same page".

[quote]Now, to answer your questions, the Sun and all the
other stars in the disk of the Milky Way galaxy are
moving in the same direction around the center and
at about the same speed regardless of their distances
from the center. That speed is 220 km/s, and this
comes to almost 500,000 miles per hour!

They are?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milky_way_galaxy#Sun.27s_location
seems to disagree with you. You got a cite for that?
[/quote]
Here it is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_curve

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net

Saul Levy · Guest

We>ve had great pics of galaxies since photography was invented,
BEERTbrain! lmao!

Seems you ARE behind just a little. It sure didn>t start with Hubble.

Saul Levy

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:14:24 -0400, herbertglazier@webtv.net (G=EMC^2
Glazier) wrote:

[quote]PAINIUS great picture and being a long time photographer it is safe for
me to say the view of a spiral galaxy is best head on. they come to use
in every angle. edge on they look like a fried egg Tilted is a tease.
Its a great mix and now that we have Hubble to show them to us its so
very wonderful Bert[/quote]

Painius · Guest

"oldcoot" <oldcoot7074@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message...
news:c2c3790e-a886-40d1-9053-f7e3327c85bc@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
[quote]On Jul 30, 11:35 am, "Painius" <starswirlern...@maol.com> wrote:

...the Sun and all the
other stars in the disk of the Milky Way galaxy are
moving in the same direction around the center and
at about the same speed regardless of their distances
from the center.

Umm.. at about the same speed *regardless of their distances from the
center*? Could you elaborate a bit more on this? Seems more like their
speeds would increase linearly (more or less) with increasing distance
from the center.
[/quote]
Elaborate? My daughter tells everybody to NEVER
ask her dad to elaborate. Because if somebody just
asks me "What time is it?", i tend to explain the inner
workings of a Grandfather>s clock. <g>

What you>re describing above is what might be seen
if the galaxy>s disk were moving like a solid gold
record or a frisbee. That>s one extreme.

The other extreme of course is Keplerian dynamics,
as is the case with our Solar System.

As Odysseus pointed out, the components of a galaxy
revolve around the hub at speeds that are in between
these two extremes...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_curve

The graph to the right shows that all the stars in the
disk, all the ones outside the "galactic bulge", travel
in the same direction at about the same speed. And
it doesn>t matter what distance the stars are from
the center of the galaxy.

This accounts for the shapes of the spiral arms.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net

Painius · Guest

"Saul Levy" <saullevy1@cox.net> wrote in message...
news:t0r1949job1p4fcgp92ntefqfuq31fl9fe@4ax.com...
[quote]On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:14:47 GMT, "Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com
wrote:

Good evidence that oc and Gordon Wolter are right!

Directions of rotation are RANDOM, Paine.

So what?
[/quote]
So it would seem, however further study is needed,
Saul. Are astronomers certain that the only major
motion of galaxies is the obvious axial rotation?

Could other major motions be involved? like maybe
wobbles, as a coin sometimes does when you drop it
on a table? or perhaps there>s also a spin axis that
slices through the center of a galaxy>s disk from one
side to the other?

I think it>s too early to draw the conclusion that all
galaxy motion is random.

And then there are the motions of clusters and the
super clusters. Everything>s supposed to be moving
toward some "Great Attractor". How "random" is
that?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

Painius That is right and I miss read it was the solar system planets
revolving opposite direction of the galaxy but the Sun and galaxy were
going clockwise. WOW 500,000 mph is a fast spin,and I bet Darla takes
full advantage of that going to Andromeda Best to keep in mind all
stars in our galaxy going in the same rotation helps my thinking that
they are locked in and our Milky Way spins like a frisbee. Its flat,and
that fits Bert

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

Timberhead I use my time to think of new stuff,and like you just did
for me give me answers. I think of questions first,and that is good.
That is the very reason for What if ? Most of my posts beg questions
to be answered by people like you. It kind of makes it fun and easier
for me I like that Bert I might be lazy

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

Cactus Saul That picture clearly shows the curved arms giving the
galaxy a counter clockwise direction,and its inner arms a clockwise
direction. That is tricky stuff(weird) Still we can visualize
how another galaxy angling in at the opposite spin can create this.
It makes good thinking that irregular galaxies were created by
collision. With so much space between galaxies irregular galaxies must
be more rare. Thought just jumped in Maybe we can tell a galaxies age
by the number of its arms,and how far they have unravelled. Large arms
older galaxy?? Since the arms hold new born stars they must be like
our sun the color blue. Closer to the bulge or even the bulge must be
the home of the galaxies older stars and the color red would be given
off. It fits Bert

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

Timberhead Here is an interesting thought All galaxies are spinning
All galaxies have a black hole at their core. Now at the exact center of
the axis there is no motion. That begs this question. Does the exact
center of the black holes axis have no motion? Does that mean the
singularity it houses there is motionless? Can I then
hypothesis that the singularity at the very exact center of a black hole
is the only place in the universe that has no motion? Can I add a
singularity has no motion. Tricky stuff Thoughts jump in like these.
GR will not fit at a black hole exact center To much mass in a smaller
than Planck length. No spacetime for a singularity. My ideas on the
deep interior of a black hole can get away with murder. Only my brain is
capable to analyze what is happening at the deep interior central point
of a black hole. I will post as I unravel the great mysteries
residing at the center of black holes. That could be my last and big
gift to humankind. Bert

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

Cactus saul Konw all about photography part in astronomy from the
beginning. Showed my fastest pictures in the world at MIT to show I can
take pictures faster than what a strobe light can do. So where is my
Nobel bert

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

Painius The Earth surface at the equator is spinning at 1030 mph How
fast is its surface spinning half way to the poles? Milky Way spinning
as if it was a frisbee always stuck in my mind Although spinning like
a fried egg seen edge on gives a better day dream picture Go figure
Bert

Saul Levy · Guest

Stickle tickle, Paine!

That narrow path is only where totality occurs. There is also a wider
path where partial phases are seen.

The total area is more than you think, but still limited.

Saul Levy

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:13:17 GMT, "Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com>
wrote:

[quote]Neat how the eclipse follows a path across the face of
the Earth. A narrow strip of shadow defines where the
Moon occults the Sun, and outside of that strip nobody
sees anything differently...

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEmono/TSE2008/TSE2008iau/TSE2008-fig02.GIF

Here>s a neat film of the eclipse>s path...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gucStsyMvoo

Watch the eclipse live here...
http://www.exploratorium.edu/eclipse/2008/[/quote]

Saul Levy · Guest

Do you have a sense of humor, BradBoi, or are you just the VILLAGE
IDIOT? lmfjao!

Which is it?

Saul Levy

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:10:22 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
<bradguth@gmail.com> wrote:

[quote]The mainstream status quo may have to do just that. On the other
hand, a 0.1% royalty going to you could eventually be worth hundreds
of millions, especially at the new and improved inflation that all of
those revised publications and textbooks are going to cost us.

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth[/quote]

Painius · Guest

"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
in message
news:timberwoof.spam-0ADF1C.14442830072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
[quote]In article <Xr0kk.140773$102.65140@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com> wrote:
"G=EMC^2 Glazier" <herbertglazier@webtv.net> wrote...
in message news:15976-488F1124-779@storefull-3334.bay.webtv.net...

Painius Nicely posted. It does beg the question Does the right hand
rule rule just as well for left handed people.

Thank you Bert!

Sure it works just as well for left-handed people, as
long as they also have a right hand to use to apply
the rule. <g

We use the Earth to
relate with all else around it. All is measured in Earth time (LY)
all is measured in man made sizes. Earth in the macro realm is the
yard
stick for the universe. Is the solar system going around the galaxy in
the same direction it is spinning?

No, it>s not. I believe i read recently that the North
Pole of the Solar System is about 117° off from the
North Pole of our galaxy.

So technically, our Solar System is spinning in the
opposite direction of our galaxy.

There are two motions to consider: First, the orbit of planets around
the sun compared to the sun>s orbit around the galactic center and the
galaxy>s main axis of rotation. Second, the orbit of the sun around the
galactic center compared to what most stars are doing.
[/quote]
In the first case as i said above, the orbits of planets
around the Sun are in directions that are opposite to
the motion of the Sun>s orbit around the galactic
center and the galaxy>s axis of rotation.

In the second case, the Sun>s orbit around the galactic
center is the same as all the other stars in the galactic
disk. The Sun goes in the same direction as all these
stars and at approximately the same speed as they do.

(As opposed to this star motion in the galactic DISK, in
the central BULGE, stars go around the hub in different
directions and at differing speeds.)

Then there>s the third known motion of the Sun. It likes
to bob up and down the 1,000 light year thickness of the
galactic disk. It does this about 2.5 times per revolution.

[quote]And to me, that>s

F A S C I N A T I N G

Is Andromeda spin help taking it in our direction?.

Maybe. It does show a blue shift, after all. As you
may remember, i>ve posted that it seems to me that
either Andromeda is the barycenter of our Local
Group of galaxies, and all the other galaxies in our
Local Group, including the Milky Way galaxy, revolve
around Andromeda, OR...

Hm. Can you give me a reference to an article where this is written up?
[/quote]
Not really, TW. The only motions that anybody seems to
recognize are those of the Andromeda in the general
direction of the Milky Way, the Andromeda and Triangulum
toward each other, the orbital or collisional motions of the
various satellite galaxies with their primaries, the motion
of the entire Local Group (Milky Way, Andromeda,
Triangulum, and over 30 satellite galaxies of each big spiral
galaxy, plus a few small "rogue" galaxies) in the direction
of the Virgo cluster of galaxies, which dominates the center
of the Virgo supercluster of galaxies. And then there>s that
fascinating motion of the entire Virgo supercluster in the
direction of the "Great Attractor", a mysterious something
that lies near the Norma cluster.

There is a quick reference in the first sentence here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_group_of_galaxies

....about the barycenter being located somewhere between
the Andromeda and Milky Way galaxies, but that>s about it.

As far as i know, i am the only one who describes the
barycenter as being either in or near the Andromeda. And
if recent observations that have concluded that even though
Andromeda is more voluminous than the Milky Way, its mass
is actually LESS than the mass of the Milky Way, then i will
have to rethink it all. This would mean that the barycenter
of the Local Group might actually be in or near our very own
Milky Way galaxy!

[quote]All the galaxies, including Andromeda revolve around
a common barycenter that>s somewhere fairly close
to Andromeda, but not inside it.

Evidence?
[/quote]
Very little, see above.

[quote]And that is what causes the blue shift... our galaxy is
"falling" toward Andromeda like our Earth "falls"
toward the Sun.

Uh, no.
[/quote]
You don>t sound very sure. <g>

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net

Painius · Guest

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" <herbertglazier@webtv.net> wrote...
in message news:15877-4891B8EA-130@storefull-3336.bay.webtv.net...
[quote]
Cactus Saul That picture clearly shows the curved arms giving the
galaxy a counter clockwise direction,and its inner arms a clockwise
direction. That is tricky stuff(weird) Still we can visualize
how another galaxy angling in at the opposite spin can create this.
It makes good thinking that irregular galaxies were created by
collision. With so much space between galaxies irregular galaxies must
be more rare. Thought just jumped in Maybe we can tell a galaxies age
by the number of its arms,and how far they have unravelled. Large arms
older galaxy?? Since the arms hold new born stars they must be like
our sun the color blue. Closer to the bulge or even the bulge must be
the home of the galaxies older stars and the color red would be given
off. It fits Bert
[/quote]
Truth be told, Bert, there are about as many stars that
exist *between* the spiral arms as there are in the arms
themselves. The reason the spiral arms "stand out" and
are brighter than the areas between them is because, as
you say, the arms contain the youngest, bluest and the
brightest stars of the galaxy. The areas between the
arms contain the oldest, reddest and the dimmest stars.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Astrology - Amateur Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
Page 8 of 9