The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: From Dust and Gas to Solar System  (Read 1510 times)

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« on: 20/01/2016 12:25:05 »
      --Birth of a Solar System--

All compact material bodies form out of clouds of dust and gas. There is no set timeframe for a compact body to form. It depends on a lot of variables. The density and composition of the cloud. The amount of Spacetime turbulence plays a big role and can be boosted by a number of ways that will go into speeding the process up.
Generally a molecular cloud will be a turbulent environment to start with. If a violent event like a Supernova goes off in relatively close proximity, then a number of processes happen to the molecular cloud that inject energy in various forms.
First a huge rush of neutrinos blasts its way through the cloud. Although weakly interacting, there will still be a large number of collisions. These can have effects like getting microscopic dust grains spinning at phenomenal speeds. These dust grains will set up through the agency of frame dragging, small vortexes throughout the cloud that will result in the accumulation of more gas and dust in the centre of each vortex.
Next will arrive ionising radiation from the SN injecting more energy and so amplifying the chaos conditions of the cloud.
This will be followed by the main player in all this.
A shockwave front emanating from the SN is spherically propagating through Spacetime. The physical mass of the star ejected spherically outwards at supersonic speeds into the Interstellar Medium.

It is this fast ejector of material that slams into the Interstellar Medium setting up a Spherical Shock Wave. This freely-expanding ejector is thus contained within an inner termination shock, where its kinetic energy is thermalised, producing a very high temperature X-ray emitting plasma. Pressures inside the supersonically expanding bubble build which helps balance the build up of interstellar gas and dust that is happening in front of the shock and maintain the expansion speed. At the same time the high energy X-Rays ionise the gasses of the Interstellar medium ahead of the shock front.
This is a very violent event and to top it all off, the magnetic fields associated with the shock-front also act as particle accelerators giving the molecular cloud further high energy impacts.
All of this turns what was already described as a chaotic system into a maelstrom of spacetime vortices of all sizes. Some of those will blend with others, some will orbit others, all of them to different degrees will be focal points for the accumulation of higher concentrations of dust and gas spinning with the Spacetime vortex they find themselves in.
Most vortexes merge to make bigger ones. The main one in any area dominates the direction of Spacetime Flow. Any of the smaller ones that don't match that dominant direction mostly lose energy to the main vortex and fall apart or just spiral into the main vortex centre.. The ones that grow big enough light up as stars. Others will turn into planets, some are fated to be moons. The majority will not get that big.
They will just be accumulations of matter of various shapes and sizes. It is a very messy process.

The shockwave will move on triggering this process along the way as well as sending hi energy cosmic rays to travel throughout the Universe.
But now behind it, the spacetime vortexes will keep accumulating matter according to their size. The whole process comes to a stop when the largest vortex in any vicinity starts nuclear fusion. A star is born.

When that star fires up, it immediately ionises the remaining gas in it's neighbourhood and magnetically funnels it to two opposing polar jets.
This achieves several things and it happens rather quickly.
By clearing all the unused gas and other ions out of the vicinity, it stops any further build up of massive bodies (planets, moons,asteroids, comets, etc).
Because it drives +ions to one polar jet and -ions to the other, The difference in Mass between the two produces propulsion that drives it out of the original cloud and on it's journey around the Galaxy. Taking with it a large chunk of it's vicinity and everything it contained. A solar system has hatched.
By getting rid of all that ionised gas it now leaves the remaining solid bodies in totally unbalanced orbits. The next period for this young solar system is to find balance. Most will crash into something bigger. Some will survive. They will find resonant orbits they can survive in longterm. All these adjustments between the larger of the remaining clumps of dense matter stirs up all the myriads of remaining smaller accumulations. There is a long period of orbit cleaning where a lot of collisions keep happening, before the young solar system settles into a long stable life.


 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3905
  • Thanked: 52 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #1 on: 20/01/2016 14:11:34 »
You are talking about dust particles causing frame dragging. Do you realise how much mass you need for any detectable effect to be present?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame-dragging
"Frame-dragging is an effect on spacetime, predicted by Einstein's general theory of relativity, that is due to non-static stationary distributions of mass–energy. A stationary field is one that is in a steady state, but the masses causing that field may be non-static, rotating for instance. The first frame-dragging effect was derived in 1918, in the framework of general relativity, by the Austrian physicists Josef Lense and Hans Thirring, and is also known as the Lense–Thirring effect.[1][2][3] They predicted that the rotation of a massive object would distort the spacetime metric, making the orbit of a nearby test particle precess. This does not happen in Newtonian mechanics for which the gravitational field of a body depends only on its mass, not on its rotation. The Lense–Thirring effect is very small—about one part in a few trillion. To detect it, it is necessary to examine a very massive object, or build an instrument that is very sensitive. More generally, the subject of effects caused by mass–energy currents is known as gravitomagnetism, in analogy with classical electromagnetism."
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #2 on: 20/01/2016 21:40:17 »
You are talking about dust particles causing frame dragging. Do you realise how much mass you need for any detectable effect to be present?
Yes Jeffrey, I do realise how small the initial effects of frame dragging would seem to us.
And yet from a tiny acorn a mighty oak grows.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.0036
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinning_dust
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015IAUGA..2257267B


And yet this effect has already been detected in the B mode polarisation of microwave signals they put out.
In fact the effect was so clearly mapped that the BICEP 2 team were convinced they were detecting CMB Gravitational waves. Of course we now know it was just spinning dust.



Everything starts somewhere. These seeds have a lot of time by our reckoning to first slowly accumulate other dust particles that are near by and build up their mass and spin.
 

Offline Alohascope

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #3 on: 20/01/2016 23:08:36 »
Dust and gas is the only 'acceptable' theory in most circles .. Consensus .. but that doesn't make it the only way planets are formed.
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #4 on: 21/01/2016 01:33:03 »
Dust and gas is the only 'acceptable' theory in most circles .. Consensus .. but that doesn't make it the only way planets are formed.
Do tell. What is your favourite hypothesis?
I was trying to describe the formation of an entire Solar System, rather than just planets, but I always enjoy alternatives. Especially if they make some sort of sense.
 

Offline Alohascope

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #5 on: 26/01/2016 22:25:30 »
As you might guess, Flow, my favourite theory about planet formation is the only theory other than Nebular Hypothesis I've encountered, the waterballs from the Waterfall Nebula theory.  In continuing my reading I've realized that the gasses from the waterfall get mingled with the water before it is shot into space .. thus, the waterballs contain the building blocks needed to create minerals which form land masses.  These waterball planets also account for the billions of planets in space not connected to solar systems.  There is no reason why these homeless planets can not gravitate towards a star, and created a solar system.

But aside from that  here's a very interesting development in light .. photonic molocules.  http://phys.org/news/2013-09-scientists-never-before-seen.html.
 

Offline Alohascope

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #6 on: 26/01/2016 22:40:20 »
But also:  http://news.discovery.com/space/lonely-planets-jupiter-solar-systems-110518.htm

These isolated planets are said to be as numerous as stars .. as I said in the post directly above this one, there is no reason why a few or several of these solitary roaming planets could not gravitate towards a star and form a solar system.  Exciting stuff .. new frontiers.
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #7 on: 27/01/2016 01:38:01 »
These isolated planets are said to be as numerous as stars .. as I said in the post directly above this one, there is no reason why a few or several of these solitary roaming planets could not gravitate towards a star and form a solar system.  Exciting stuff .. new frontiers.
You are close to my view in a lot of ways. Certainly you could start with blobs of water to end up with any body we look at from stars to comets. That is as viable an avenue as any. and a number of different processes can achieve the same end results.
When you say solitary planets can be captured to form a solar system, I have to disagree. Yes the occasional capture will happen here and there, but solar systems as a general rule are created in the same space at the same time as all their components.
Also when you say that these free planets are as numerous as stars, I would say they are more numerous than stars. Just like moon sized objects are more numerous than planet sized objects and large asteroid/comet objects are more numerous than moon sized objects and small asteroid/comet more again and gravel even more, etc etc.
Only a small percentage of the vortexes get to grow big enough to be stars.
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1906
  • Thanked: 122 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #8 on: 27/01/2016 12:52:27 »
Did read somewhere, but didn't keep the reference, that dust, gravel, etc tends to stick together due to surface molecule attractions (although a lot bounces off) and slowly build up into a sizeable lump, which then has enough mass to attract other lumps etc.
I assume that would be enough to get your idea going.
 

Offline Alohascope

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #9 on: 27/01/2016 22:44:28 »
These isolated planets are said to be as numerous as stars .. as I said in the post directly above this one, there is no reason why a few or several of these solitary roaming planets could not gravitate towards a star and form a solar system.  Exciting stuff .. new frontiers.
You are close to my view in a lot of ways. Certainly you could start with blobs of water to end up with any body we look at from stars to comets. That is as viable an avenue as any. and a number of different processes can achieve the same end results.
When you say solitary planets can be captured to form a solar system, I have to disagree. Yes the occasional capture will happen here and there, but solar systems as a general rule are created in the same space at the same time as all their components.
Also when you say that these free planets are as numerous as stars, I would say they are more numerous than stars. Just like moon sized objects are more numerous than planet sized objects and large asteroid/comet objects are more numerous than moon sized objects and small asteroid/comet more again and gravel even more, etc etc.
Only a small percentage of the vortexes get to grow big enough to be stars.

Your partial agreement is encouraging, Flow, as far as the blobs of water goes, but I think you're still stuck on what you learned in school .. the 200 year old Nebular Hypothesis.  I know it's difficult to get away from first impressions, but we must if we are to progress in science, progress from the point of primitive observation and rote into the realm of possibility.  For very good reason Einstein said, "Imagination is more important than knowledge" because he knew observation is very, very limited while imagination is boundless .. his thought experiments were the result.
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #10 on: 27/01/2016 22:51:08 »
Did read somewhere, but didn't keep the reference, that dust, gravel, etc tends to stick together due to surface molecule attractions (although a lot bounces off) and slowly build up into a sizeable lump, which then has enough mass to attract other lumps etc.
I assume that would be enough to get your idea going.

That is one of the current models being considered. Unfortunately whenever an attempt is made to simulate it, it runs into problems getting from the gravel to the boulder stage.

What I tried to describe above depends on my own proposal of Space Flow. In this model the starting point is a micron sized dust grain. Small enough to be sufficiently spun up by lets say an impact with a high energy cosmic ray. Such spinning dust grains are known as they emit strongly in radio. The spacetime vortexes they create have been detected through the "B mode" polarisation that the spinning spacetime around them is creating.
With Space Flow, the spacetime around them spirals into them bringing with it any and all gas and dust it contains. The build up of material is then totally inevitable as all the added material spirals in following it's own geodesics, and so adding not only matter but more angular momentum in the form of more spin. It becomes a positive feedback loop.
There is no bouncing off and no chemical bonds needed (although chemistry will happen anyway) as it is flowing spacetime itself that is sticking everything together.
There is also no difficult transition from one size to another.
In a shocked molecular cloud there would literally be billions of these vortices of all different scales. They simultaneously create everything from gravel to the biggest stars. The process only stops when one or more of these start nuclear fusion disrupting the accumulation in the immediate vicinity by ionising and directing all the gas to the two polar jets, thus removing the supply of accumulation material.
This differs from the current thinking as we seem to currently think that a star forms all by itself and then the planets and everything else forms out of that star's accretion disk. This accretion process may keep going for a short time after ignition in the outer reaches as the newborn star will start ionising and clearing from the inside outwards, but what I'm saying still holds true.
Accumulation comes to an end fairly rapidly when fusion starts.
Planets have either formed by then or they never do.
« Last Edit: 27/01/2016 23:14:09 by Space Flow »
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #11 on: 27/01/2016 22:56:04 »
Your partial agreement is encouraging, Flow, as far as the blobs of water goes, but I think you're still stuck on what you learned in school .. the 200 year old Nebular Hypothesis.  I know it's difficult to get away from first impressions, but we must if we are to progress in science, progress from the point of primitive observation and rote into the realm of possibility.
I'm not sure what exactly you are pointing to when you say I am stuck in a 200 year old nebular hypothesis.
Which part of my proposal doesn't make sense to you?
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #12 on: 28/01/2016 00:37:02 »
      --Birth of a Solar System--

All compact material bodies form out of clouds of dust and gas.

Just one question - where does the dust and gas originate from?
 

Offline Alohascope

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #13 on: 28/01/2016 02:11:39 »
Your partial agreement is encouraging, Flow, as far as the blobs of water goes, but I think you're still stuck on what you learned in school .. the 200 year old Nebular Hypothesis.  I know it's difficult to get away from first impressions, but we must if we are to progress in science, progress from the point of primitive observation and rote into the realm of possibility.
I'm not sure what exactly you are pointing to when you say I am stuck in a 200 year old nebular hypothesis.
Which part of my proposal doesn't make sense to you?

I read into your response that you thought the new theory may not be possible .. maybe I was wrong in reading that in .. but generally, a person who is stuck on Consensus can't consider new ideas no matter what the idea or evidence is.  I agree that the Nebular Hypothesis is possible, probable, and apparently factual .. no problem with that .. but it's not the ONLY way solar systems form.
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #14 on: 28/01/2016 04:49:16 »
I read into your response that you thought the new theory may not be possible .. maybe I was wrong in reading that in .. but generally, a person who is stuck on Consensus can't consider new ideas no matter what the idea or evidence is.  I agree that the Nebular Hypothesis is possible, probable, and apparently factual .. no problem with that .. but it's not the ONLY way solar systems form.
We seem to be talking about the same thing on two different posts. As you may be able to see from my own posts, although I have a fair understanding of the consensus view as you call it, I am far from being one to not consider new ideas. I in fact have a few of my own.

Quote from: Space Flow on 20 January 2016, 23:25:05
      --Birth of a Solar System--

All compact material bodies form out of clouds of dust and gas.

Just one question - where does the dust and gas originate from?

Astronomy 101.
There was apparently something called a Big Bang that started timespace and so a Universe full of  Quarks and other associated fundamental particles.
Rumour has it that those fundamental particles had a bit of a Gang Bang of their own and ended up in complicated relationships called Neutrons.
These Neutrons now did not like this neutrality, they wanted to party too so a lot of them evicted parts of their complex structure in the form of Electrons and Neutrinos and again started Banging.
Anyway the end result seems to have been about about 75% of hydrogen, about 25% helium, about 0.01% of deuterium and helium-3, trace amounts (on the order of 10⁻¹⁰ ) of lithium, and negligible heavier elements.
These basic ingredients through the process of star birth and death have gradually and continually since that time been getting further polluted with more and more heavier elements. These complex mixes of dust and gas are what is been referred to above.
Hope that helps
« Last Edit: 28/01/2016 04:54:19 by Space Flow »
 

Offline Alohascope

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #15 on: 28/01/2016 20:22:44 »
With the Cosmic Microwave Background found to be simply heat from dust, and with the period of Rapid Inflation being fudge to explain differering ages of stars and universe it is clear that Big Bang is defunct.  Growth of anti-gravity bubbles known as Voids drives the expansion of the universe.
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #16 on: 29/01/2016 02:58:27 »
With the Cosmic Microwave Background found to be simply heat from dust, and with the period of Rapid Inflation being fudge to explain differering ages of stars and universe it is clear that Big Bang is defunct.
Possibly.... I know that inflation theory as it stands is really hanging on the detection of the predicted gravitational wave effects. They may still be found. Who knows.
There are different theories, but observable data is what decides in the end. Maybe we don't need inflation, maybe there's another explanation for why the universe that we see when run backwards ends up in a hot dense state.
Maybe what we see as the CMB is really the Big Bang itself. Maybe the Universe didn't start from a point but from a solid volume of 380,000 light year radius, containing all the matter and no space.
With no space you can't define density therefore infinite is as good a definition as any but in a finite volume. Who knows?
Growth of anti-gravity bubbles known as Voids drives the expansion of the universe.
But of course.
That is just another way to phrase the accepted truth. What you call the consensus.
The expansion of the Universe does not effect gravitationally bound systems. Therefore if the Universe is expanding and gravitationally bound systems are not, it is reasonable to say that expansion is observed to be happening in the voids.
Areas with matter are getting denser and the voids are getting bigger. This is not news.
Have a look at this
It will put everything in perspective.
 

Offline Alohascope

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #17 on: 29/01/2016 20:09:57 »
With the Cosmic Microwave Background found to be simply heat from dust, and with the period of Rapid Inflation being fudge to explain differering ages of stars and universe it is clear that Big Bang is defunct.
Possibly.... I know that inflation theory as it stands is really hanging on the detection of the predicted gravitational wave effects. They may still be found. Who knows.
There are different theories, but observable data is what decides in the end. Maybe we don't need inflation, maybe there's another explanation for why the universe that we see when run backwards ends up in a hot dense state.
Maybe what we see as the CMB is really the Big Bang itself. Maybe the Universe didn't start from a point but from a solid volume of 380,000 light year radius, containing all the matter and no space.
With no space you can't define density therefore infinite is as good a definition as any but in a finite volume. Who knows?
Growth of anti-gravity bubbles known as Voids drives the expansion of the universe.

That is just another way to phrase the accepted truth. What you call the consensus.

Have a look at this
It will put everything in perspective.

Hi Flow .. Thanks for your partial confirmation of my scenario, but as you know the Consensus is that the universe expanded from a singularity .. the Big Bang .. while the consensus says Dark Energy is driving the expansion, not the growth of voids.  I believe Dark Energy is probably a reality and perhaps partially drives the expansion, but the voids (anti-gravity bubbles) and matter have nothing to do with singularity .. rather voids and matter both originated in quantum fluctuations arising from nothing across the space of what became the universe, matter arising from nothing an idea proposed by one of the foremost originators and developers of quantum theory, Pascual Jordan, who because of his Nazi Party sympathies is almost erased from history.  Jordan was said to have stunned Einstein by his revelation that 'the stars arose from nothing.'  Einstein is said to have 'stopped in his tracks' as he crossed a street in Princeton, when told by, I believe it was Max Born, what Pascual had discovered, what is now known as the Zero Energy Universe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe  I used to carry Jordan's quote explaining why stars are made from nothing, but lost that little note.  http://www.britannica.com/biography/Pascual-Jordan.  However, Jordan was not aware of Voids, so could not have contemplated the voids as having anti-gravity energy.  Furthermore, Dark Energy is said, I believe, to arise from vacuum energy, that vacuum created by the expansion of space driven by the expansion of the anti-gravity bubble Voids.  That is my scenario, and I'm sticking to it as it seems to explain it all.
« Last Edit: 29/01/2016 20:14:11 by Alohascope »
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #18 on: 29/01/2016 22:36:02 »
Alohascope, that is a lot of hypothesis mixed in there. You will find that if you really look into it, except for wording, you are a lot closer to the current scientific consensus than you might like to believe. In a lot of the things you mention, more than me.
You see when science says that dark energy is driving the expansion, it means they do not have a satisfactory hypothesis let alone a theory as to what is driving the expansion.
Dark energy is not presented as something in particular. It is a placeholder name for something we can't explain. Namely the observed accelerating expansion of the Universe.
We can see that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. Acceleration requires an input of energy by our understanding of how things work. We can not point at anything to explain where that energy can possibly be coming from, yet we witness what definitely appears to be work being done.
Hence the place holder name "Dark Energy" until the actual cause for these observations is found.
That has not happened yet.
As for the expansion happening in the voids, that is the consensus view. I don't understand how you think it isn't. I have done some MOOCs and listened to quite a few lectures on the subject and that is what is being taught.
Expansion is happening everywhere the same but the effect is so small over small scales that it is totally overridden by gravity. therefore no expansion is observed in gravity bound environments. Only in the non-gravity bound environments. The voids are getting bigger. That is what the consensus is teaching and that is what you are saying.
Now the  difference that I can see is that the scientific community is still using the place holder name "Dark Energy" effectively saying they still don't have a consensus that satisfactorily explains these observations and you are saying that you do.
(anti-gravity bubbles)
Now in light of the scientific consensus saying that they do not know, by still using the placeholder name, yours is an extraordinary claim and if you wish it to be taken seriously the onus is on you to provide extraordinary evidence in it's defence.

Now this singularity thing. You do realise that a singularity is only a result of the observed expansion being run backwards till the computer breaks, don't you?
Science can have nothing to say about anything that tries to ask about "before" time. That means that science has no way to address or describe anything that in anyway refers to a before the first plank moment has already happened. It can not talk about the Big Bang itself or even what it was that might have banged, or if anything could have banged at all. All of that is outside the principles that science operates under. Yes the mathematics run backwards from now with no further data to constrain it, will naturally go to a singularity. But that is just the mathematics with the information we have at the moment. Mathematics is a language. As a language it is a very good tool for describing our Universe. Mathematics is not our Universe and of itself is not science.
There are no infinities in nature. Infinity is a human tool and has it's uses but like the mathematics that uses it, is only a tool not reality.
voids and matter both originated in quantum fluctuations arising from nothing across the space of what became the universe, matter arising from nothing an idea proposed by one of the foremost originators and developers of quantum theory, Pascual Jordan, who because of his Nazi Party sympathies is almost erased from history.
As far as anything arising from nothing, that is in the same category as your anti-gravity bubbles. An extraordinary claim that is going to require extraordinary evidence before it becomes consensus. If that ever happens than maybe your hero will receive his due notoriety.
The main reason it is being banded about at the moment is because inflationary theory depends on it. Inflationary theory has yet to prove itself and although it currently holds a slight majority, it is only slight and faces a lot of opposition. Without inflation we have no need of vacuum fluctuations. They are in effect assumptions based on assumptions.
Dark energy arising from vacuum fluctuations is a proposal put forward by Guth and his followers of inflation theory and again is based on assumptions that are based on assumptions. It is not consensus view. And it is certainly not fact.
The latest reports from CERN do not support this view as spacetime has so far been found to be perfectly smooth to bellow the level that inflation predicts there should have been fluctuations seen.
Needless to say that unless something extraordinary happens soon, Inflation theory, along with the things it predicts like primordial gravity waves, Vacuum fluctuations, Zero point energy, etc etc. could all very well be relegated to fantasy and human imagination only.
Space flow theory on the other hand adequately explains why expansion is only observed in the voids, and that video I posted above supports the flow view. Space Flow accounts for the observations that matter is moving towards matter therefore away from areas of less matter.
The voids are getting bigger.
No anti gravity or anything else exotic necessary. Just geometry...
« Last Edit: 02/02/2016 01:06:57 by Space Flow »
 

Offline Alohascope

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #19 on: 29/01/2016 22:55:27 »
Flow I would not want my ideas to become Consensus, as Consensus upholds a theory as fact even though it is just theory .. Big Bang for instance.  And yes the Big Bang originated as a very primitive idea any child could have imagined after watching a firecracker blow up .. BOOM.

The main difference between your proposal and mine seems to be that Voids are, in your proposal, growing because matter flows towards matter, while in mine matter is pushed towards matter by the growth of the Voids because of what is happening inside the Void .. the void pushing at Spacetime as well as matter. 

 
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #20 on: 29/01/2016 23:54:37 »
The main difference between your proposal and mine seems to be that Voids are, in your proposal, growing because matter flows towards matter, while in mine matter is pushed towards matter by the growth of the Voids because of what is happening inside the Void .. the void pushing at Spacetime as well as matter.
Yes the end result is the same. Yet I can show the flow patterns and spectroscopically backed up movements in support of Space Flow's interpretation. The above linked 3D mapping clearly shows matter streaming towards higher concentrations of matter and therefore away from the voids.
You may have to come up with some sort of corroborating evidence to support your view of a push out of the voids that can explain the movement patterns we are observing. I would have expected that if your anti-gravity void effect was real that the voids would be more spherical with an even push out on all sides. That is certainly not what we observe.
 

Offline Alohascope

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #21 on: 02/02/2016 00:59:18 »
The main difference between your proposal and mine seems to be that Voids are, in your proposal, growing because matter flows towards matter, while in mine matter is pushed towards matter by the growth of the Voids because of what is happening inside the Void .. the void pushing at Spacetime as well as matter.
Yes the end result is the same. Yet I can show the flow patterns and spectroscopically backed up movements in support of Space Flow's interpretation. The above linked 3D mapping clearly shows matter streaming towards higher concentrations of matter and therefore away from the voids.
You may have to come up with some sort of corroborating evidence to support your view of a push out of the voids that can explain the movement patterns we are observing. I would have expected that if your anti-gravity void effect was real that the voids would be more spherical with an even push out on all sides. That is certainly not what we observe.

Why spherical?  S;pace is not a vacuum.  If Dark Matter and Dark Energy are real they can easily vary in density in different places.  Also, currents in space are known to exist .. if a bubble comes in contact with a current the bubble can be shaped by the current.  Currents can be created by squeezing of space between bubbles.  I've read that a large group of galaxies is being carried on a current into an empty part of space.  I wish googling these things was simple .. but cellphone adverts get in the mix.  As far as evidence goes, I can't provide that any more than string theorists can present evidence of their theories, yet string theory is a major interest.  That's all I hope to do .. generate interest in possibilities.
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #22 on: 02/02/2016 01:55:48 »
Why spherical?  S;pace is not a vacuum.
Obviously this was an assumption on my part while trying to visualise how such an anti gravity force/effect from within a Void would act on its surroundings.
If such a force existed, how could it drive void expansion asymmetrically?
If Dark Matter and Dark Energy are real they can easily vary in density in different places.
I see that you give this argument as part explanation for the observed asymmetry. Yet those two are "one" not related to each other, and "two" are both placeholder names for unexplained observational effects. Not a very stable base to build on. Also if Space Flow theory is right, Dark Matter ceases to exist as the effect it has been evoked to explain, is adequately explained by flow patterns.
Also, currents in space are known to exist .. if a bubble comes in contact with a current the bubble can be shaped by the current.  Currents can be created by squeezing of space between bubbles.
Currents in space are not known to exist. I say they are there, hence the Space Flow theory, but as far as I know I am one of only two so far unexpected theories that support fluid like movement of Spacetime.
 
I've read that a large group of galaxies is being carried on a current into an empty part of space.
Now this sounds really interesting to me. If you can find this article again I would really like a link.

As far as evidence goes, I can't provide that any more than string theorists can present evidence of their theories
String theorists, who I class in the same category as theologians, at least have workable mathematics pointing towards their their ideas. They can claim that it works mathematically. To me I take that with a grain of salt. After all Ptolemy proved mathematically that the Earth is the centre of the Universe. Mathematics is just another language. It can be used to tell tall tales as well as being able to accurately describe reality.
That's all I hope to do .. generate interest in possibilities.
And here we are in 100% agreement. Interest in possibilities is what moves humanity closer to finding truths.
Who knows where the next big step forward is going to come from.
If history is anything to go by, then it is just as likely be you, as it is to come from a huge research team working with unlimited budget.
Keep punching..
« Last Edit: 02/02/2016 01:59:49 by Space Flow »
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #23 on: 02/02/2016 07:59:27 »
from Ghost particle to ghost particle to dust
 

Offline Alohascope

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #24 on: 04/02/2016 20:53:29 »
I would like to find a link to the currents carrying that group of galaxies .. but I can't at this time I'll keep looking though, but  Currents in space have been known for the past few or several years, and electrical currents are prevalent in 'The Electric Universe' theory .. but that's not my connection.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: From Dust and Gas to Solar System
« Reply #24 on: 04/02/2016 20:53:29 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length