1

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 17/07/2022 12:41:50 »

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 05:32:04
Let's focus now on your sever mistake about "the rapid breakup of arms".

No.
We need you to focus on actually understanding what we say.

Halc (& Kryptid) are the only persons in this site that are brave enough to offer real technical data even if it proves my understanding
While you  just say No , No No, without offering any real data or mathematics.
Therefore I really admire Halc for his honesty in this reply.
Halc clearly had stated that our scientists "predict the rapid breakup of arm":

predict the rapid breakup of arms

That prediction is a direct outcome from the Dark matter.
Halc actually confirmed that the arms are broken quickly.
I don't need more than that.

Now, as you claim that I don't know, then would you kindly answer the following questions?

1. Broken arms in spiral galaxy
How quickly the the arms are broken?
Is it after one galactic orbital cycle of our sun (S7.5 - in 240MY) or 0.1 cycle (in 24MY)?
Can we agree on 100MY?

2. Recovery from broken arms
A. Can you please explain the process how the dark matter by itself can help the spiral arms to be recovered to their nice symmetrical spiral shape after they have been broken?
B. Is it just an issue of a good luck like a lottery? What is the chance for the galaxy to win the lottery and gain back its spiral arms
C. How long time is needed? Is it also about 100MY or 10^10..00 Billion years?

Please, this time real technical data and not just arm waving!

 

2

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 17/07/2022 05:32:04 »

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 05:09:54
As both stars orbit at the same velocity

Oops

Why "Oops"?
Please look at the following rotation velocity of stars:
https://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/thompson.1847/1101/RotCurve2.gif
Don't you agree that stars at the spiral disc orbit at almost the same velocity?

As the velocity of stars in the spiral disc is almost the same, don't you agree that those stars at any radius sould cover almost the same distance at any given fixed time fram?
Therefore, while a star at 15 KPC sets only one galactic orbital cycle, how many cycles stars at 7.5KPC and 3KPC would have to do - based on your math?

Quote
Sorry, why do you claim that my assertions are wrong.

Because they predict the rapid breakup of arms

Wow!!!
You fully that our scientists "predict the rapid breakup of arms"
That exactly meet my assertion that based on the dark matter imagination, spiral arms should be broken very quickly..
You call it: "the rapid breakup of arms".
What is the meaning of "rapid"
Do you agree that the arms are broken very quickly?
If so, how quickly?
Is it after one galactic orbital cycle of our sun (S7.5 - in 240MY) or 0.1 cycle (in 24MY)?
Can we agree on 100MY?
However, how the spiral arm could be recovered?
Can you please explain the process how the dark matter by itself can help the spiral arms to be recovered to their nice symmetrical spiral shape after they have been broken?
Is it just an issue of a good luck like a lottery?
So, what is the chance for the galaxy to win the lottery and gain back its spiral arms
How long time is needed? Is it also about 100MY or 10^10..00 Billion years?

yet most galaxies have arms

That is fully correct. Every two galaxies out of three are spiral.
Therefore, your imagination about "the rapid breakup of arms" is just incorrect.
How can you claim that based on your wrong theory it is predicted that the arms would be broken quickly, while the observation proves that the spiral arms are fully stable in all those 280 Billions galaxies?

Your claims contradict evidence, but that's nothing new.

I claim that the arms are stable (or actually "metastable").
The imagination of "therapid breakup of arms" is just incorrect.
The 280 Billion spiral galaxies PROVE it!
Sorry, as you fully understand that based on the dark matter the arms should be broken quickly, while "most galaxies have arms" then you have to know that your theory about the dark matter imagination is just incorrect!!!!
Therefore, my claim meets the evidence/observation by 100%.

Answer the reading comprehension questions Dave,

I will. Promise.
Please, let me answer your questions one by one.
Let's focus now on your sever mistake about "the rapid breakup of arms".

Your attempts at math to support your position are even worse than your arm waving gibberish.

So please show your math that is based on real data/observation (as I did) and not just "arm waving".

3

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 16/07/2022 05:09:54 »

Quote from: Dave Lev on 08/07/2022 06:22:55
Please set each star at a fixed velocity and fixed orbital radius.
Based on my basic logic, while a star at 15KPC complete only one galactic cycle, a star at the same arm at 3KPC would have to set 5 orbital cycles.
So please, based on your superior logic, how many orbital cycles (for the one at 15KPC) are needed in order to break the spiral arm structure?

Here you actually make a point. Stars closer to the center go around much more often than the ones further out

Thanks

The ratio of 5 is poor mathematics, but the ratio is not far from that.

The distance that a star should cover in one orbital cycle is:
S=2πR
Hence,
S3 (for the one at 3KPC) = 2π3KPC
S15 (for the one at 15KPC) = 2π15KPC
Hence
S15 / S3 = 5.
As both stars orbit at the same velocity, then by the time that S15 sets only one orbital cycle, S3 would have to set exactly 5 orbital cycles.
So why do you claim that "The ratio of 5 is poor mathematics"?
Can you please offer better mathematics?

Our Sun is located at about 7.5KPC from the center of the galaxy.
Therefore we can claim that
S7.5 / S3 = 2.5

You're giving evidence that your assertions are wrong. Not sure why you're doing this.

Sorry, why do you claim that my assertions are wrong.
What is wrong?
Please look again on the following image of the milky way:

Please look at the following image of the Milky Way:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Schematic-view-of-the-spiral-arms-of-the-Milky-Way-Georgelin-Georgelin-1976-with-the_fig1_23795669
Please set each star at a fixed velocity and fixed orbital radius.
Based on my basic logic, while a star at 15KPC complete only one galactic cycle, a star at the same arm at 3KPC would have to set 5 orbital cycles.

What is wrong with my logic?
Don't you agree by now that by the time that S15 would set only one orbital cycle, S7.5 would have to set 2.5 cycles and S3 would have would set 5 cycles?
If you agree with that, then why don't you agree that after one orbital cycle of S15, that spiral arm shape must be broken.
So how can we explain that 280B galaxies at the entire visible universe at different ages keep their spiral shape for very long time?
If you still think that dark matter by itself can keep the spiral shape after one orbital cycle of S15, then please explain how it works.

4

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 15/07/2022 15:11:50 »

He never will understand.

As you think that you do understand, then please advice what is the meaning of the following message:

" If they are disconnected the bar shows its true and smaller structure (left)."

https://scitechdaily.com/galactic-bar-paradox-a-mysterious-and-long-standing-cosmic-conundrum-resolved-in-cosmic-dance/
"The bar in the center and the spiral arms are thought to rotate at different speeds. If they are disconnected the bar shows its true and smaller structure (left). Every time they meet, the bar appears longer and its rotation slower (right). Credit: T. Hilmi / University of Surrey"

Actually, you don't need to know science. Basic logic is good enough.
So, please based on your superior logic, what do you understand from the observation that the bar is shorter/smaller at the moment of disconnection from the spiral arm?

What is the real flow of stars?
Is it from the Bar to the spiral arm, or from the spiral arm to the bar.

5

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 15/07/2022 12:08:24 »

As far as I can tell, you just are not bright enough to realise why you are wrong.
I feel like might as well try to explain astronomy to a dog.

Let's make it clear.
In order to avoid the message about your inability to explain how spiral galaxy really works, you attack the messenger.
This is your expected approach which you constantly use any time that you have no clue what should be the real answer.
You are using the Dog, penguins and fish just to show that you don't have a basic clue about my following question:

Would you kindly explain how all those billions of stars that are orbiting at the same velocity (about 220Km/s)  but at different galactic radius (from 3KPC to 15KPC) could be kept at the same spiral arm for even one orbital galactic cycle without breaking the spiral shape?
In order to help you please look again at the following image of the Milky way:
Quote from: Dave Lev on 11/07/2022 05:27:44
Quote from: Dave Lev on 08/07/2022 06:22:55
Please look at the following image of the Milky Way:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Schematic-view-of-the-spiral-arms-of-the-Milky-Way-Georgelin-Georgelin-1976-with-the_fig1_23795669
Please set each star at a fixed velocity and fixed orbital radius.
Based on my basic logic, while a star at 15KPC complete only one galactic cycle, a star at the same arm at 3KPC would have to set 5 orbital cycles.
So please, based on your superior logic, how many orbital cycles (for the one at 15KPC) are needed in order to break the spiral arm structure?

Therefore, please don't take it personally as all the Astronomers together in the entire universe don't have a basic clue how the dark matter can form the unique shape of spiral galaxy.
So, you can go on with your Zoo land as you wish. Unfortunately, it won't help even for one spiral galaxy to keep its spiral structure for just one galactic cycle.
The dark matter by itself can't explain the Bar, Ring and spiral structure.

However, our Astronomers don't really care about it.
They just offer an imagination that is called dark matter to solve the orbital velocity while they totally ignore the full structure of the galaxy.
Hence, they clearly ignore any observation that could contradict their theory.
They don't care that any second galaxy in the Universe is spiral.
They don't care that there are 280 Billions of spiral galaxies just in the visible Universe.
They only care that the current mainstream would be kept on forever.
We OBSERVE that the bar transfer stars to the spiral arms and ring.
It is stated clearly:
https://scitechdaily.com/galactic-bar-paradox-a-mysterious-and-long-standing-cosmic-conundrum-resolved-in-cosmic-dance/
"The bar in the center and the spiral arms are thought to rotate at different speeds. If they are disconnected the bar shows its true and smaller structure (left). Every time they meet, the bar appears longer and its rotation slower (right). Credit: T. Hilmi / University of Surrey"
So it is stated clearly:
" If they are disconnected the bar shows its true and smaller structure (left)."
Hence:
Once the Bar is disconnected from the spiral arm, it becomes SMALLER.
Therefore, stars are transferred from the bar directly into the spiral arms & Ring.
That observation proves that the Bar is used to funnel stars from the Bulge into the spiral arm/Bar and not vice versa.

However, this observation kills the current mainstream:

Our scientists wish to believe that the SMBH eats stars from the Bulge while new stars are delivered/funneled from the bar to the Bulge.
However, how could it be that the Bulge can supply stars outside to the Bar and at the same time supply stars to the SMBH to be eaten while it is still full with so many stars?
So, from where all the matter for those stars in the Bulge are coming from? If it is not from outside (bar) and it is not from inside (SMBH) then from where the matter is coming?
I hope that by now we all fully accept the observation that the Bar funnels stars from the Bulge to the spiral arms and ring.
Hence, could it be that the second imagination of our scientists that the SMBH is eating stars from inside the Bulge is just incorrect?

6

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 13/07/2022 05:01:45 »

There are also no mentions of penguins eating fish.
But that does not mean that penguins do not eat fish, does it?

Dear BC
I hope that you do understand that spiral arms are quite more complicate than penguins eating fish.
The Milky way is waiting for your superior Logic.
All the other 280 Billions of spiral galaxies are also waiting.
So, please harry up.
They all might lose their spiral arms as the dark matter by itself can't help.

7

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 12/07/2022 05:33:21 »

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 05:27:44
"The rotation curve of a disc galaxy (also called a velocity curve) is a plot of the orbital speeds of visible stars or gas in that galaxy versus their radial distance from that galaxy's center."

And the stars in the arms are rotating about the centre of the galaxy.

As you claim that the stars in the arms are rotating about the centre of the galaxy, then do you agree that each star keeps its galactic orbital radius and orbital velocity?
If so and as your logic is superior;

You problem isn't just a lack of understanding of science, it's a failure to understand basic logic.

Would you kindly explain how all those billions of stars that are orbiting at the same velocity (about 220Km/s)  but at different galactic radius (from 3KPC to 15KPC) could be kept at the same spiral arm for even one orbital galactic cycle without breaking the spiral shape?
In order to help you please look again at the following image of the Milky way:

Quote from: Dave Lev on 08/07/2022 06:22:55
Please look at the following image of the Milky Way:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Schematic-view-of-the-spiral-arms-of-the-Milky-Way-Georgelin-Georgelin-1976-with-the_fig1_23795669
Please set each star at a fixed velocity and fixed orbital radius.

Based on my basic logic, while a star at 15KPC complete only one galactic cycle, a star at the same arm at 3KPC would have to set 5 orbital cycles.
So please, based on your superior logic, how many orbital cycles (for the one at 15KPC) are needed in order to break the spiral arm structure?

8

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 11/07/2022 05:27:44 »

1.  Galactic rotation.

That includes the rotation of the spiral arms of the galaxy.

No, it isn't
Did you had the chance to read the following message from Halc:

Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 09:55:04
So, you accept that, without it, Kepler's laws are broken.

FYI, there's a lot of references to Kepler's laws (the third one especially), yet those laws only apply to orbits of insignificant masses about one significant (effectively point) mass. So the laws are not violated either with or without dark matter since the laws are not applicable in the first place.
1) 'Orbits' about the galaxy are not elliptical, or even planar.
2) A line segment joining some star and center of the galaxy does not sweep out equal areas during equal intervals of time, although it's pretty close with any star that has little eccentricity to its path.
3) 'Orbit' periods do not follow the square-cube rule, with or without dark matter.

There is no "arm" in this explanation.
In order to get better understanding, please also see the following:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_curve
"The rotation curve of a disc galaxy (also called a velocity curve) is a plot of the orbital speeds of visible stars or gas in that galaxy versus their radial distance from that galaxy's center."
"The galaxy rotation problem is the discrepancy between observed galaxy rotation curves and the theoretical prediction, assuming a centrally dominated mass associated with the observed luminous material."
Therefore, it is all about star that orbits around "centrally dominated mass" at a "radial distance from that galaxy's center."
There is no arm in this story.
It is all about a star that orbits at a constant radius around the center of the galaxy.
Actually, in this article, they discuss about the arm and they claim:
"When mass profiles of galaxies are calculated from the distribution of stars in spirals and mass-to-light ratios in the stellar disks, they do not match with the masses derived from the observed rotation curves and the law of gravity. A solution to this conundrum is to hypothesize the existence of dark matter and to assume its distribution from the galaxy's center out to its halo."
So, they don't claim that stars are bonded to the arm, but try to calculate the effective mass due to the distribution of stars in spirals and find that those stars "do not match with the masses derived from the observed rotation curves and the law of gravity"
Therefore, they just ignore the observation that all of those stars are bonded in the spiral arms and totally ignore the real meaning of all observations.
Hence, they clearly see that the arms are full with stars, but from their point of view, each star must bond itself to the center of the galaxy and not to the spiral arm.
Therefore, the spiral arm has no real meaning to our scientists.

So why do you all insist to ignore the key functionality of the spiral?

Because there is no reason to suppose it has a function.

Is it?
Please look at the following image:

Please look at the following image of the Milky way:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Schematic-view-of-the-spiral-arms-of-the-Milky-Way-Georgelin-Georgelin-1976-with-the_fig1_23795669

Please set each star at a fixed velocity and fixed orbital radius.
What would happen to the spiral structure after just one galactic orbital cycle?
Don't you agree that stars would be moved outside the arms and the spiral shape would be broken?
Actually, there is no need for one full galactic cycle, even after 0.1 of a cycle, stars would already be moved away from the arms (especially at the far end) and the spiral shape would be broken.
The Sun complete one galactic cycle in 240 MY.
So, in just 24MY from now our sun would be out of the Orion spiral arm.
In the same token we can assume that also 24 MY ago it was also outside the spiral arm.
Therefore, we are just lucky that as we open our eyes suddenly the Milky Way got its wonderful spiral structure.
We are also so lucky that every two galaxies out of three in the entire universe are just transformed into spiral galaxies.
Wow how lucky we are that we can observe 280B spiral galaxies at all ages (from only 0.5BY to 13.8BY).
Sorry, those 280 Billion galaxies do no lie to us. There is no luck in those spiral galaxies.
They all work on the same basic law of newton gravity force that bond a star to the spiral arm and is called metastable stage.

Hence, As long as our scientists would refuse to understand the real meaning of spiral arms, they won't understand how spiral galaxy really works.

9

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 10/07/2022 19:42:26 »

The motion of the spiral arm was exactly what the dark matter was hypothesised to explain.

Sorry, you have a severe mistake.
The dark matter doesn't care about the spiral arms, Ring and Bar
It is mainly about the galactic rotation of stars.
Please see the following replies:

Scientist's 'invented' dark matter to explain:
1.  Galactic rotation.
2.  The movement of galaxies in galactic clusters.
3.  The greater than expected gravitation lensing of galactic clusters.
4.  The distribution of the cosmic background microwave radiation.

What about the complex structure of spiral Galaxy?
Why our scientists totally ignore that somehow there are 280 Billions spiral that should be explained (while the dark matter doesn't give any answer for their complex structure)?

What is being violated without dark matter is basic Newtonian law. We have objects (our solar system say) that accelerate far more than can be accounted for by the sum of the forces applied by all the various baryonic masses in the galaxy. Thus there must either be more (a lot more) mass that isn't baryonic, or Newton's laws (the inverse square one concerning gravitational attraction) are wrong.

Your explanation is valid as long as we ignore the arms.
So, if you look at a single star (as our solar system) and try to accounted the sum of the forces applied on it by all the various baryonic masses in the galaxy then you are fully correct - 

there must either be more (a lot more) mass that isn't baryonic

However, in this case, you totally ignore the great impact of the spiral arm?
Why is it so difficult to understand that any star outside the Bulge doesn't hold itself to the center of the galaxy, but holds itself to the arms (spiral arm, ring arm & bar arm)?
We have full observation that proves it.
How many times do I have to offer you the same article?

I have just found an excellent article about the Bar:
https://scitechdaily.com/galactic-bar-paradox-a-mysterious-and-long-standing-cosmic-conundrum-resolved-in-cosmic-dance/
It is stated:
"The bar pulsations result from its regular encounters with the Galactic spiral arms, in what can be described as a “cosmic dance”. As the bar and spiral arm approach each other, their mutual attraction due to gravity makes the bar slow down and the spiral speed up. Once connected, the two structures move as one and the bar appears much longer and slower than it actually is. As the dancers split apart, the bar speeds up while the spiral slows back down."
It is specifically stated: "their mutual attraction due to gravity makes the bar slow down and the spiral speed up."
It is also stated: "Once connected, the two structures move as one"

So why do you all insist to ignore the key functionality of the spiral?
Don't you understand that it is all about: "mutual attraction due to gravity" between the ordinary matter..

the "mutual attraction due to gravity" between the ordinary matter (stars and gas) at the edge of the Bar to the ordinary matter in the base of the spiral arm can bond them together and "move as one".

Why do you refuse to understand that the solar system doesn't need to bond itself by gravity to the center of the galaxy, but bond itself to the spiral arm by its own gravity, while the spiral arm is bounded by its gravity to the ring arm?
Hence there is no need for extra gravity force to bond the solar system to the center of the galaxy.
As long as the solar is bonded to the spiral arm, it would go wherever the spiral arm goes
However, if our Sun, would dare to move away from its spiral arm, then there isn't enough baryonic gravity to hold it in its orbital motion and it would be ejected from the galactic disc as a rocket.

10

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 10/07/2022 06:26:35 »

but you think that it is needed for the spiral arms?

Yes.

And  then you ignored it.

I didn't ignore it.
Even in the last reply I have stated:

The dark matter by itself can't give any answer for the complex shape/structure of the spiral galaxy.
At the maximum, it gives an answer for the orbital velocity of stars at the spiral section. That's all.
Therefore, this idea which breaks the law of physics and can't help the spiral galaxy to form its unique shape with all its complex structure is just irrelevant
Spiral Galaxy is more than just orbital velocity.

So, let's make it clear.
Do you confirm that the Dark matter has invented to "glue" the individual star in a fixed orbital motion (and radius) around the galaxy while its location in the arm was totally ignored?
Hence, the spiral arm was absolutely irrelevant for those scientists that have invented the dark matter imagination
without any second verification about the idea that the all those stars are located in spiral arms (including bridges and gateways between the arms)?
So, each star in the galaxy keeps its orbital radius around the galaxy by his own gravity force to the center of the galaxy.
Therefore, in order to help each star to accomplish his mission to keep its orbital radius while all move in a similar velocity, the dark matter had been invented.
Bravo!!!

Hence, based on this imagination our scientists have understood that stars must get in and out from the spiral arms. (as they have totally ignored the arms)
In order to solve this new problem our scientists have invented new idea that is called "density wave".
https://www.pa.uky.edu/~shlosman/anim/spiral_jam.gif
Based on this new imagination, due to the chance that there might be some traffic jam there is a possibility to get the spiral structure while each star in the galaxy keeps its orbital radius and its orbital velocity.
Second Bravo!!!

However, our scientists don't have any clue why there is a ring in the galaxy.
Why the based on the spiral arm is always connected to that ring from outside?
Why there is a bar?
 Why the bar is always in the inwards side of the ring?
And many other questions..

Do you really think that by offering dark matter to all of those 400 Billions of galaxies that are located in the visible universe, somehow 280 Billions would form their complex spiral structure,?
Let's assume that this imagination is correct and try to verify if it can work:
Take a sphere of 15KPC, set a SMBH at the center, set randomly 250 Billions of stars inside of that sphere (each one at different radius and at different orbital plane (as it is a Mega Bulge) and finally add the magic dark matter based on any sort of formula that you wish.
Now try to run it in your computer.
What is the chance to get any sort of disc shape from this random orbital motion of each star in the Mega Bulge (up to15KPC)?
If the dark matter works so well, why the Bulge (up to 1KPC) has a spherical shape instead of disc shape?
How many orbital cycles are needed for the Mega Bulge to be transformed to full spiral galaxy structure with its Bulge, Bar, Ring and spiral arm shape?
is it 50 cycles or 10^100....0 cycles?

Let's focus on the Milky Way:
Based on the current understanding, it takes the Sun 240MY to set one orbital galactic cycle while it keeps its radius of 8KPC.
Therefore, Even if the Sun was there from day one of the galaxy, at the maximum it could set 13By/240M = 54 cycles.
So, what is the chance for the Milky way to get its full spiral galaxy structure in just 54 galactic cycles of the sun?

On the other hand, let's assume that 54 cycles is perfectly OK.
A star that is located at 4KPC in the spiral arm would set one orbital cycle in 120MY
Hence, how long it should take the sun (or any other star) to get out from its spiral arm and how long it should take the spiral galaxy to break its structure?

So, how can you explain that for any three galaxies in the Universe, about two galaxies are spirals (remember the 70%)?
Do you think that all of those 280 Billions spiral galaxies are there just by good chance of traffic jam?

Sorry, the dark matter & the traffic jam can't represent any sort of science.
It is a pure imagination from people that have totally failed to understand how spiral galaxy really works.
Unfortunately you keep on with this approach.

11

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 09/07/2022 13:59:45 »

The one that doesn't violate Kepler's law.

Dark matter imagination is the only one that violates Kepler's law.
We already know that there is no need for extra gravity at the Bar.
Please see the following confirmation for that from Kryptid:

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 20:12:19
Therefore it must be stable structure and there is no need for dark matter to explain the orbital velocity at the Bar.

I never said that dark matter was needed for the bar.

Thanks
So can we agree that the dark matter is not needed for the bar, but you think that it is needed for the spiral arms?

Therefore, as there is no need for dark matter in the bar, while based on the data it is fully there in the bar section (between 1KPC to 3KPC), then this dark matter clearly violates Kepler's law.
Please also be aware that this imagination can't give any explanation for the unique shape of spiral galaxy.
Therefore, it is irrelevant

You should be glad to understand why you are incorrect.
But you refuse to.

Sorry, you are the one that refuse to understand that the spiral galaxy doesn't need even one particle of dark matter.

Please read the following:

Any arm in the spiral galaxy (bar arm, ring arm & spiral arm) is based on "mutual attraction due to gravity" between the stars and gas in that arm.

I also like the following message from Kryptid about the arms:

Metastable is probably the better word.

So, the arms in the spiral galaxy is all about "mutual attraction due to gravity" between the stars and gas that are located in Metastable stage.
Once a section from the arm (with its hundreds or thousands stars) is ejected from the spiral arm, it get its stable stage by converting to globular cluster.
Therefore, all the globular clusters that we observe around the Milky Way are just small sections of arms that had been ejected from the spiral arms.
As long as the stars and gas are in the galaxy's arm - they are considered at their Metastable stage and form the arm structure.
Once, they are out of the galaxy's arm - they are considered at their stable stage and form the globular cluster structure

Since part of your idea is impossible because of the laws of physics, the whole of your idea is impossible because of the laws of physics.

There is no mistake in my idea as it fully meets all laws of physics especially the gravity law.
While the idea of existing of dark matter that we can't detect by any sort of detector and it still has so severe impact on gravity - this is the real idea that breaks the law of physics.

In any case, my idea gives perfect explanation for the full structure of the spiral galaxy.
It shows why the 280 Billions spiral galaxies in the visible universe can keep their structure for billions and trillions of years.
The dark matter by itself can't give any answer for the complex shape/structure of the spiral galaxy.
At the maximum, it gives an answer for the orbital velocity of stars at the spiral section. That's all.
Therefore, this idea which breaks the law of physics and can't help the spiral galaxy to form its unique shape with all its complex structure is just irrelevant
Spiral Galaxy is more than just orbital velocity.
Real theory must answer all the questions about spiral galaxy stracture (if possible - in one single explanation).
As the explanation about the "mutual attraction due to gravity" between the stars and gas in the galaxy' arm is the only one that offers full explanation for the complete structure of the spiral galaxy without any need for extra imagination - then it proves that it is the only real one!

12

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 09/07/2022 08:07:56 »

So how spiral galaxy really works:

Any arm in the spiral galaxy (bar arm, ring arm & spiral arm) is based on "mutual attraction due to gravity" between the stars and gas in that arm.
However, the Ring arm is the most important arm in the spiral galaxy.
There are many spiral galaxies without bar arm, but in order to have the bar, they must have the ring (even if it is thin and difficult to be fully observed).
The ring arm is the boundary between the bar arm to the spiral arm.
From outside, it generates the gravity force that holds the base of the spiral arms.
From inside it generates the gravity force that is needed to pull stars from the bulge and form them together in the bar shape by their "mutual attraction due to gravity".
The stars in the Bar arm, would be delivered to the spiral arms and to the ring while the spiral arm would be drifted outwards.
In this way, the structure of the entire spiral arms would be kept even while stars in the spiral arms are drifting outwards.
That drifting outwards movement of the stars in the spiral arms can keep them all in a relatively constant orbital velocity while they increase their radius around the galactic disc. In the same token the spiral arm would keep them all in the galactic disc and they would have to go wherever the spiral arm goes.
As the star gets to the edge of the spiral arm it would be ejected from the arm and from the galactic disc.
Please be aware that there might be a possibility for bridges and gateways between the spiral arms.
A star can hold itself to any arm, bridge or gateway by the "mutual attraction due to gravity"
However, once it moves out of those sections, it would be ejected from the galactic disc.
This is the real simple story about the spiral galaxy.
it is all about "mutual attraction due to gravity" between stars and gas without any need for dark matter.


Now, which theory is more realistic?
Is it the dark matter that can't explain the shape of the spiral galaxy (and many other questions)?
Or
Is it this simple understanding that gives an explanation for each section in the spiral arm and show why 280 Billion galaxies can hold their structure for almost indefinitely?

13

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 09/07/2022 06:33:38 »

Nothing of note has been accomplished in this thread.

Yes it is.
At least, do you agree that the dark matter can't explain the complex structure of spiral galaxy?
Yes or no please?

On the other hand, there is clear OBSERVATION that the Bar arm and the spiral arm are temporarily connected by "their mutual attraction due to gravity" and "move as one".

I have just found an excellent article about the Bar:
https://scitechdaily.com/galactic-bar-paradox-a-mysterious-and-long-standing-cosmic-conundrum-resolved-in-cosmic-dance/
It is stated:
"The bar pulsations result from its regular encounters with the Galactic spiral arms, in what can be described as a “cosmic dance”. As the bar and spiral arm approach each other, their mutual attraction due to gravity makes the bar slow down and the spiral speed up. Once connected, the two structures move as one and the bar appears much longer and slower than it actually is. As the dancers split apart, the bar speeds up while the spiral slows back down."
It is specifically stated: "their mutual attraction due to gravity makes the bar slow down and the spiral speed up."
It is also stated: "Once connected, the two structures move as one"

So it is all about gravity that connects the stars in the Bar to those in the spiral arm so they all become one.
Wow!!!
What a great information!!!
I was looking for that information for years.
This is the smoking gun of the spiral galaxy!

Not gravity between dark matter to ordinary matter but gravity between two key elements (Bar and spiral arms) in the spiral galaxy that are all based on ordinary matter as stars.
If our scientists would understand the real meaning of this explanation, they would verify that there is no need for dark matter. The stars (ordinary matter) in each element in the galaxy are good enough to maintain its full structure (Bulge, Bar, Ring, Spiral arms...) without any need for even one particle of dark matter!
Take out one element from that complex and you break down the galaxy.
Nothing would help - not even dark matter.

This isn't imagination.
It proves that the "mutual attraction due to gravity" between the ordinary matter (stars and gas) at the edge of the Bar to the ordinary matter in the base of the spiral arm can bond them together and "move as one".
Therefore, we have a clear observation for the bonding impact of the "mutual attraction due to gravity" between stars and gas in the arms (which is all about - ordinary matter).
There is no need for dark matter to bond the stars and gas in the bar to the stars and gas in the spiral arm.
It is all about "mutual attraction due to gravity" of stras and gas between the arms.
In the same token, why the same "mutual attraction due to gravity" of stras and gas that works so perfectly between the arms can't work also in each arm?
Therefore, this is clear observation that stars and gas in each arm can bond themselves by thier "mutual attraction due to gravity" in order to form the arm shape (Bar arm, ring arm and spiral arm).
Once we accept that simple observation, we can easily solve the enigma of spiral galaxy without any need for dark matter.
Each moon goes wherever its planet goes, as each planet goes wherever its star/Sun goes, as each star in the arm goes wherever its arm goes and as each arm goes wherever the galaxy goes.
280 Billions of spiral galaxy - do not make any mistake as they do not need any dark matter. They all base on "mutual attraction due to gravity".

So simple as it is!

14

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 09/07/2022 04:50:21 »

This discussion is obviously just going around in circles with nothing being accomplished.

This discussion is very important as we have accomplished key understanding - The dark matter is incorrect theory.
We have already proved that there is no need for Dark matter in the Bar.
The orbital velocity of stars in the bar can be fully explained by the shape of the bar.
Therefore, the existence of the dark matter in that bar violates Kepler's third law.

I hope that by now we also fully agree that the dark matter by itself can't explain the full structure of the spiral galaxy.
At the best case it can only offer an answer for the orbital rotation velocity of stars in the spiral arms section, but it doesn't give an explanation why there are spiral arms in the disc, why there is a ring, why the bar is always inwards to the ring while the spirals arms are always outwards and many other key questions about the spiral galaxy shape.
We know that 70% of the 400 Billions galaxies in the visible universe are spirals galaxies. ( = 280 Billions)
Therefore, there must be a mechanism that can force/set those 280 Billions galaxies in that specific spiral shape.
I hope that by now we understand that this Mechanism can't be base on dark matter.
Therefore, as the dark matter can't give an answer for the complex shape of the spiral galaxies, it is clear that this dark matter theory is incorrect.

I'm done.

Please don't be upset because of the dark matter.
The science community should be glad to understand that the dark matter is incorrect.
It is much better for the science community to abandon wrong theory and stay without any theory instead of holding an error one in their hand.

If part of your idea breaks the laws of physics, then the whole idea is going to be wrong too.

Even if you would find that my explanation about the spiral galaxy is incorrect, the science community must abandon the dark matter imagination.
Somehow, the science community must look for better theory which can explain the existence of those 280 Billions spiral galaxies just in the visible universe.
As the dark matter can't explain the full shape of spiral galaxy (Bulge, Bar, Ring, Disc, Spiral arms... ) - that dark matter imagination should be abandon and the sooner is better.
Therefore, please don't be upset.
It might be small step for us, but it is a big step for the science community.

15

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 08/07/2022 06:22:55 »

Hello
I'm Back

Quote from: Dave Lev on 04/07/2022 07:27:58
The outwards section of the bar is located at the same radius as the most inwards side of the spiral arms.
Therefore, this answer is clearly incorrect.

That would be the location at which gravitational dominance switches from that of normal matter to that of dark matter.
Take a look at figure 22 on this page: https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Sept16/Sofue/Sofue4.html
The mass contribution of the dark halo begins to dominate the other forms of mass between 1 and 10 kiloparsecs. Inside of that, the other, normal parts of the galaxy make up greater mass contributions. At about 100 parsecs, the bulge appears to have over 10 times the mass contribution of the dark halo.

Please look again at figure22
https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Sept16/Sofue/Figures/figure22.jpg

The dark matter influence is described by the black line that is called - direct mass sphere (and a similar red line that is called - flat disc) and it starts from 10^-3 KPC. (which means 1PC = 3.2 LY)
Therefore, the dark matter has neglected impact till about 3LY.
Up to this 3LY range the gravity impact is mainly due to the Black hole.
Therefore, based on the graph the dark matter has an impact From that 3LY (10^-3 KPC) upwards.
So yes, your following message is correct:

The mass contribution of the dark halo begins to dominate the other forms of mass between 1 and 10 kiloparsecs.

However, the bar is located from 1KPC to 3KPC.
Therefore, this graph fully supports my message that the bar is dominated by the mass contribution of the dark halo/matter.
We already know that based on Kepler's third law, in the bar (from 1KPC to 3KPC) there is no need for the dark matter at all.
Hence, the existence of dark matter in the bar violates Kepler's third law!
When we try to focus on the edge of the bar (3KPC), where the ring is located and the spiral arm starts, we don't see any change is the dark matter line.

Quote from: Dave Lev on 04/07/2022 07:27:58
However, you refuse to understand how the ordinary matter can fully explain the rotation curve anomaly.

I'm not refusing to understand it, it's just that it doesn't work. It violates Kepler's third law.

Sorry, you are.
I have just proved that the existence of dark matter in the bar fully violates Kepler's third law.
So, the dark matter imagination clearly can't work!
I hope that you agree that the dark matter can't explain the full structure of the spiral galaxy.
It can't explain why the ring is at 3KPC, why the bar is always inwards to the ring and the spiral arms are always outwards to the ring.
Actually, if you take this graph and run it in the the computer, the chance to get back the structure of the spiral galaxy (Bulge, Bar, ring, spiral arms)  is purely ZERO!
You know it and anyone knows it.

There is a limit on how fast the gravity from normal matter can make the stars orbit. That limit is represented by Kepler's third law.

Sorry, there is no limit.
You all miss the key functionality of the arms in the galaxy (Bar, ring or spiral). Yes the ring is also an arm!!!
You refuse to understand that once the star is bonded to the arm (in the Bar, Ring, or spiral), it must go wherever the arm goes.
Any attempt to look on individual star that is located in the arm (and is gravity bonded to the arm), and try to calculate its velocity as there is no arm - is a FATAL mistake!!!
Hence, when you base the star orbital velocity on the imagination that the arm has no impact, you made a sever mistake that leads you to wrong conclusions - which is:

It violates Kepler's third law.

Sorry, No!
Unfortunately, you refuse to understand that ONLY the arm is responsible for the velocity of the stars that it carry with it.
You keep holding the dark matter imagination which clearly violates Kepler's third law in the bar, just to explain the orbital velocity of stars that are bonded to the arm while it can't explain the full structure of the spiral galaxy.
This is your severe mistake!

Please look at the following image of the Milky way:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Schematic-view-of-the-spiral-arms-of-the-Milky-Way-Georgelin-Georgelin-1976-with-the_fig1_23795669
Please, Please try to assume that all the arms are based on stars that are bonded by gravity.
I claim that the mutual gravity force of ordinary matter as stars and gas form the arm structure.
If you don't accept it, then please assume for just one moment that the dark matter is used as an extra bonding element between the stars in the arm (even if if there is no need for that imagination).
In any case, let's agree that we start our explanation about the spiral galaxy while each arm is all about stars that are bonded by gravity (with or without dark matter or dark glue).

Therefore, the ring, Bar and spirals arms are all about stars that are bonded together by their mutual gravity force..
Are you ready to stop the No No NO messages and let me explain how real spiral galaxy works?
Please don't try to show why there is an error in my explanation before you fully understand how the full spiral galaxy structure really works.
I feel as a teacher in a class room where the students don't want to listen and claiming No No no.... on every message that I try to deliver.
Is there any possibility for them to understand my message?
So please. even if you are sure that my explanation is incorrect, would you kindly try to be positive, assume that each arm in the galaxy is all about stars that are bonded together by their mutual gravity force and let me offer full explanation about spiral galaxy based on the steps that I select?
Please...

I wish to start with the ring as this is the most important element in the spiral galaxy!
At the end of my explanation, you are more than welcome to compare this explanation to the dark matter imagination and decide which one is superior and which one really violates Kepler's third law.
Agree?

16

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 04/07/2022 07:27:58 »

My suspicion is this: close to the galactic center, it could be that the density of normal matter is higher than that of dark matter. If that's the case, then the gravitational influence of normal matter would dominate the orbital speeds of stars. In the outer regions of the galaxy, where normal matter is less dense, dark matter would dominate the contribution to the orbital speeds.

The outwards section of the bar is located at the same radius as the most inwards side of the spiral arms.
Therefore, this answer is clearly incorrect.

Are you acknowledging the need for dark matter to explain the rotation curve anomaly now?

There is no need for dark matter.
However, you refuse to understand how the ordinary matter can fully explain the rotation curve anomaly.

What it obeys is the laws of physics, not scientists.

The dark matter by itself doesn't obey to any law of physics.
As there is no person that can see without been seen, there is no matter that can set a gravity impact without detecting its existence by any sort of detectors.
However I really wish to thank you for giving me permission to use this dark magic,

You could do that if you wanted to, but you'd need to show why your version of dark matter is better than what scientists have already come up with.

Yes, I would show you why my personal imagination about the dark matter works perfectly OK at the spiral galaxy and how this magic answers all the open questions and meet the observation by 100%.
From now on there will be no puzzled scientist.
You would know how everything really works.

However, I would do so upon my return from the Business trip.
Thanks and have a good day

17

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 04/07/2022 05:03:57 »

There is no need for it to be there in the sense that normal matter has enough gravity to explain it, but that doesn't mean that it isn't there. It's not a fatal error.

So we all agree that there s no need for dark matter in the Bar.
However, you claim that the dark matter is there without any need to be there won't effect the bar.
You offer the following explanation:

That's like saying that the fact that an electric vehicle doesn't need gasoline, then no other cars should need gasoline either.

I claim that your example is just incorrect.
Dark matter isn't gasoline - it is an engine or jet engine by itself.
How can you tell the dark matter to work at the spiral while based on your explanation it covers the whole galaxy?
So how can you tell it to work at the spiral and ignore the bar?
Sorry - If you belive that the dark matter has an impact on stars in the spiral arms then it also must have an impact on stars in the Bar.

I never said that dark matter was only in the spiral arms: just that dark matter can solve the rotation curve anomaly in the spiral arms.

Let's make it clear - the rotation curve anomaly exists ONLY in the spiral arms
Therefore I hope that you fully agree, that this dark matter is ONLY needed to solve the rotation curve anomaly in the spiral arms.
So, how could it be that you are using a something that is called dark matter that has a sever impact on any star in the galaxy and force it to work on the stars at the spiral arms but not on the stars in the Bar.
Do you have some sort of a switch that you can set it on and of?
On for the spiral, off for the bar.
Would you kindly explain how that switch really works?

Don't you agree that the dark matter works as sort of a jet engin as it must speed up any star at the spiral from 3KPC to 15KPC.
However, the bar also gets to 3KPC.
Our scientists OBSERVE that the spiral arms is fully connected to the Bar exactly at 3KPC - I have PROVED IT.
So how can you tell the dark matter to work on a star that is located at 3KPC in the spiral arm and not work on a nearby star that is still located at 3KPC in the bar.

Therefore, your example about the an electric vehicle that doesn't need gasoline is just irrelevant.
You have to explain how an electric vehicle could still work while we connect a Jet engine to that vehicle that works constantly.

Actually, while I write this message I have a brilliant idea for our scientists.
I hope that we all agree that our scientists don't have a basic clue what is the dark matter, how it had been formed and why it came to save the spiral galaxies in the entire universe.
They just hope that this dark matter exists as a sphere around the center of the galaxy at different densities which is based on a very specific formula that they have invented.
For each spiral galaxy there is a need for different density of dark matter and therefore, different formula is needed for all the millions of a billions spiral galaxies.
Please also be aware that the dark matter should move with the MW galaxy while it cross the space at 600 Km/s.
It can't move from the center of the galaxy.
Any movement of the dark matter from the center, would break the spiral arms and our scientists would be very upset.
So, at least so far we fully agree that the dark matter fully obey to the wish of our scientists

I wonder, why there are still 30% galaxies which are not spiral.
How could it be that the dark matter has neglected those poor galaxies?
I also wonder what would happen to the dark matter after the collision between two spiral galaxies?

In any case, as we discuss about imagination dark matter that we can't see, I have a brilliant advice to our scientists.
Instead of asking the dark matter cover the whole galaxy and distinguish between a star at 3KPC that is located at the bar to the other one at 3KPC that is located in the spiral arm, why can't we just invent a formula that works only at the spiral arm?
So, this dark matter would be able to bond the stars in the spiral arm and stretch it as we wish.
Therefore, wherever you claim that my explanation is incorrect:

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 21:41:37
But you know that what I say is just incorrect.

Right.

I would use the magic dark matter to do the job.
I can invent the formula for the dark matter that can do whatever I wish it to do.
As it works only at the spiral arm, it won't have any negative impact on the bar.

So please, why our scientists can't use my idea of dark matter that is only focus in the spiral arms in order to solve the rotation curve anomaly in those arms without any negative impact on the bar?

What you say doesn't come close to meeting observation by 100%. There are no giant pipes in space that the spiral arms are moving through.

That replay shows that you refuse to understand my message for how the spiral arms work.

Therefore, are you ready to accept my explanation about the spiral arms while I'm using the dark matter imagination to support my wish?

Or it is forbidden for me to use the dark matter as only our key scientists have the permission to use it whenever is needed,and at any formula that they wish/invent as my name is Dave and not Einstein?.

PS
I 'm living today outside the country for few days and may not have time to respond

18

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 03/07/2022 21:41:37 »

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 05:05:08
Do you confirm that the thickness of the arm at the base (3KPC) is 3000 LY, at our location (8KPC) it is 1000LY and at the edge (15KPC) it is 400LY?
YES or NO please

I haven't looked it up, but it sounds reasonable so I'll say "yes" for now.

Thanks

Spiral arms aren't contained inside of pipes.

Spiral arms are made out of Gas and Stars.
Our scientists tell us the diameter of that arm and it goes thinner as we go further away from the base.
Therefore, don't you agree that technically it has a pipe shape?

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 05:05:08
If yes, how can you explain that structure of the arm? Why it gets narrower?  Or you just don't care?

I don't know, but it sure isn't because it's flowing like water through a narrowing pipe.

As you don't know, how do you know that what you don't know is correct or incorrect?
You don't know:
Why there is a ring
Why the bar is always in the inner side of the ring,
Yhy the Bar has a propeller shape
Why there is no need for dark matter to explain the orbital velocity at the bar.
Why the spiral arms are always at the outwards side of the ring,
Why it gets thinner at we move further away from the base
Why it has always spiral shape (why not bar shape)?
But you know that what I say is just incorrect.

I have a simple question for you:
Do you reconfirm that there is no need for the Dark matter in the Bar?
If so, do you confirm that it was a fatal error from our scientists to offer dark matter also for the Bar?

How can you agree with the logic that for one key section - the bar section (up to 3KPC) there is no need for dark matter while as our scientists can't explain the spiral arm based on ordinary matter - then suddenly the dark matter pop up?

Sorry - the bar by itself proves that there is no need for dark matter. Not in the bar and not in the spiral arm
If you don't agree with my explanation - then please look for better explanation that is based on ordinary matter and not on the imagination dark matter.

I offer you a solution for how the spiral can work without dark matter and you reject this explanation without knowing how it really works.

Is there any possibility for you to evaluate my explanation based on the same level that you evaluate the message from our scientists?
Or is it just impossible request as whatever our scientists say is always correct (even if we prove that their message is just incorrect (as there is no need for dark matter for the bar and no solution for all the questions) while whatever I say is always incorrect (even if it meets the observation by 100%)?

19

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 03/07/2022 05:05:08 »

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 03:19:18
This is similar to a pipe that goes narrow at the edge.
If the water comes in at a radius of R1 and goes out at smaller radius of R2 then the water flow should be increased by:
(R1 / R2) ^2

Very poor analogy. The stars in a galactic arm don't behave even remotely like water flowing through a narrowing pipe. There are no giant pipes constraining the movement of stars. They are in a near-vacuum.

Why do you insist to ignore the structure of the spiral arm?
Why?
Do you confirm that the thickness of the arm at the base (3KPC) is 3000 LY, at our location (8KPC) it is 1000LY and at the edge (15KPC) it is 400LY?
YES or NO please
If yes, how can you explain that structure of the arm? Why it gets narrower?  Or you just don't care?

The Earth and Moon stay with the Sun because there are in orbit around the Sun. The whole of the stars in the spiral arms are not in orbit around each other.

Sorry, you totally misunderstand how the gravity works at a glubular cluster that is located in its Metastable phase while it is in the arm.
So, please look again at M80:

Please look at the following image of M80:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globular_cluster#/media/File:A_Swarm_of_Ancient_Stars_-_GPN-2000-000930.jpg
"M80 contains hundreds of thousands of stars, all held together by their mutual gravitational attraction."

Do you confirm that each one of those hundreds of thousands of stars must orbit around its Common center of mass in order to hold itself in that Globular cluster?
Yes or no please?

20

New Theories / Re: What is the real meaning of the most-distant-quasar/galaxy?

« on: 03/07/2022 03:19:18 »

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 19:50:08
At some point it would be disconnected from the arm and would be ejected from the galactic disc.

Not at a mere 220 km/s, it won't be. The escape velocity of the Milky Way is over 500 km/s.

How did you get the 500 Km/sec
Is it based on the dark matter imagination?
If so, please eliminate the dark matter and reset the calculation.

That's not how that works. As they get further away from the central source of gravity, they should slow down (if normal matter was all there was in the galaxy). So your proposal is (still) wrong.

You still miss the main activity of the arm.
The stars in the arm don't care about the central source of gravity as they only care about the arm.
They hold themselves to the arm and goes wherever the arm goes.
This is identical to the Erath/moon motion.
They really don't care about their motion in the galaxy.
They just hold sun by gravity and they go wherever the sun goes.
In the same token, the sun just holds itself in the Orion arm and goes wherever the arm goes.

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 19:50:08
I agree that stars in the spiral arms can stay in the arm for very few galactic orbital cycles before they would be ejected from the arm.

Much less than one.

Well, if the diameter of the arm was fixed then this answer was correct.
However, we know that the diameter of the arm at the base is 3000LY while at the edge it is 400LY.
This is similar to a pipe that goes narrow at the edge.
If the water comes in at a radius of R1 and goes out at smaller radius of R2 then the water flow should be increased by:
(R1 / R2) ^2
Hence the drifting flow of the stars is increasing as we move further away from the base.
The diameter of the arm at our location is 1000LY
So the radius of the arm had been already decreased by 3
Therefore, the drifting flow of the stars would be increased by 3^2 = 9
At the edge, the diameter is only 400LY. Therefore, the drifting flow would be increased by:
(3000/400)^2 = 56.4
That increase in the drifting flow of stars in the arm, would give the arm the possibility to keep the stars for longer orbital cycle around the galactic center.
However, when the arm gets so narrow its gravity bonding force is decreasing dramatically.
As its diameter gets to 400LY it actually gets to its maximal ability to hold the star in the arm.
It can't be narrower than that as the gravity force of the arm is too low and it can't hold the stars any more.
Therefore, the stars would be ejected from the arm and set the globular cluster shape that we see around the galaxy.

.

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 19:50:08
The globular cluster that is located at the outermost side of the arm is under the strongest forces due to its furthest location and therefore the thickness of the arm at the edge is just 400LY.

Most globular clusters are not located in arms of the galaxy.

That is correct
Theoretically, a global cluster in the arm would be considered in its metastable phase and it would form the arm shape.
Once it would be disconnected from the arm, it would get its stable spherical shape