1

New Theories / How gravity works in spiral galaxy?

« on: 24/11/2018 08:30:27 »

Further our discussion about new matter creation at the excretion disc of the Milky way:
Please see: https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=75261.40

I wonder why any new particle/Atom/Molecular is drifting outwards from the excretion disc of the milky way.
Let's look at the following formula for gravity force:
F = G * M * m / R^2
M = The mass of the SMBH
m = The mass of the particle/Atom/Molecular.

Based on this formula there is no change in the gravity force over time.
Hence, by definition each new atom has to stay at the same radius forever.

So how can we justify the drifting outwards mechanism of any new particle/Atom/Molecular?

Could it be that something is missing in the following formula:
F = G * M * m / R^2
Could it be that over time there is a change in the gravity force? (Even if it is only a very minor change).
Do you know that the American continent is drifting away from the European continent by only 1.5 cm per year.
In the past they were fully connected.
So, just based on that small change per year, we have got the vast ocean between those two continents after long time.
We know that:
1. The moon is drifting away from the Earth (by about 1.5 cm per year)
2. The Earth is also drifting away from the Sun.
3. All the planets in the solar system are drifting away from the Sun.
4. All/Most of the moons are drifting away from their host planet.

But objects can also drift inwards.
There are plenty of orbital objects (satellites...) around the Earth that drift inwards and eventually fall down.
Hence, could it be that gravity force must be changed over time?
Actually, if we think about it, it is clear that nothing can stay the same forever. Although there is no friction in space, it seems to me that even gravity can't stay the same forever.
There must be some small change in gravity force over time (even very small change over very long time)
So, could it be that we have to use the following formula:
F = G * M * m / R^2 +/- F(t)
F(t) = represents the change in the gravity force over time.
If the object is in orbital cycle which is too close to the host, the value of F(t) must be positive.
However, if the radius is long enough, the value must be negative.

So, with regards to our solar system:
All the planets are located far enough from the Sun.
Therefore, the value of F(t) for each one of them must be negative. Hence, over time (long enough), the gravity force on each planet is decreasing. In order to compensate that decreasing in gravity force, the planet must drift outwards.

In the same token, could it be that each particle in the plasma is located long enough from the SMBH.
Therefore, its F(t) is negative.
If so, the total gravity force on each particle in the plasma is decreasing over time.
That decreasing gravity force drifts away the particle from the center.

Do you agree with that?

2

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / What is needed to create new atoms in the Universe?

« on: 04/11/2018 07:37:11 »

What is needed to create new Atom?
Could it be: High temp? High pressure? High velocity? High magnetic/electric power?
Where can we find all of those elements is our Universe?
Could it be that the accretion disc of the SMBH (in spiral galaxy) supports all of those requirements?.
Please do not confuse it with accretion disc of any kind of star/s.
With regards to the plasma at the accretion disc.
Do you agree that it is very unique?
The Temperature of that plasma is as high as 10 ^9 c - much higher than the core of the Sun which is only 10 ^6 c.
It orbits at almost the speed of light.
It face a huge pressure due to the SMBH gravity force.
The magnetic /electric power there is very high.
The structure of the plasma is changing as we go outwards.
In the most inwards side we only see particles which could be the building blocks for an Atom, while at the outer side we clearly see Atoms and even molecular.
So, could it be that the huge gravity force of the SMBH is transformed into a power which can create new quarks, new Protons & Neutrons, New Atoms and all the variety of molecular?
We see clearly that some of the mass in the accretion disc are ejected out.
However, there is no evidence for any sort of mass which is drifting inwards to the accretion disc.
Which means - that the accretion disc ejects mass without getting any mass from the outer side.
If that is correct, do you agree that the only explanation for that is - new mass creation in the accretion disc?
What kind of elements do we see in the big gas clouds around that Accretion disc?
Do we see there mainly Hydrogen Atoms and wide variety of Molecular?
Do we see new star forming activity in those gas clouds?
So, can we assume that those gas clouded which had been ejected from the accretion disc, start their activity to form new stars which will be part of our mighty spiral galaxy?

3

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Is it feasible to create higgs boson without accelerator?

« on: 09/09/2018 13:18:48 »

Based on the following:

The rightmost particles are unstable, and quickly decay into the stable particles to the left.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_(particle_physics)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model
The other quarks have very high energies, and can only be created for an instant in our most powerful particle accelerators. These emulate the extreme energies that existed for a moment during the Big Bang, when these heavy particles would have been stable (for a moment).

The CERN accelerator has the requested magnetic power to run the beam at ultra high speed in order to create the higgs boson.
So, is it feasible to create higgs boson by pure/infinite energy, without using accelerator and magnetic power?

4

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Could it be that gravity by itself can explain the stracture of spiral galaxy?

« on: 17/06/2018 20:39:29 »

Could it be that gravity by itself can explain the stracture of spiral galaxy?

Please read and advise.

Could it be that our scientists have missed the main structure of spiral galaxy?
They only see spiral arms.But this is just one element in the galaxy.
Why they can't see that there are bridges and branches between the arms?
So, the spiral galaxy is a complex of structure with few spiral arms but with many bridges and branches.
Could it be that gravity force leads the whole activity in the galaxy?
We all know that Gravity works locally, while locally is relativity!!!
Therefore, as the moon orbits around the Earth/moon center of mass, the Sun orbits around the local arm center of mass.
As the Earth/moon center of mass orbits around the Sun, the Sun' local center of mass orbits around the center of the galaxy.
So, could it be that the Sun doesn't orbit around the galaxy but it orbits around a local center of mass?
Please look at the following:
http://www.biocab.org/Motions_of_the_Solar_System.jpg
Do you agree that it shows that the Sun orbits around a local center of mass in the Spiral arm?
We see clearly that as it orbits this center, it moves in and out to the galactic center and also up and down to the disc.
Could it be that the only explanation for that is a simple orbital cycle?
I really wonder how could it be that our scientists have failed to see this key element?
However, this is just part of the story.
Let's assume that our Sun also drifts outwards from the Center.
Therefore, its real velocity is not identical to the spiral arm velocity.
Actually, if we could force the arm to stay at one location, we should see that as the Sun drifts outwards, it can still have a significant velocity. We should also see that the Sun sets a nice orbital cycle around its local center of mass.
Hence, could it be that although the spiral arm orbits at lower velocity around the center of the galaxy, the Sun can gain higher velocity and still stay in the spiral arm which is based on gravity dense?
We can think about it as some sort of gravity highway:
http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/...ity+Wave+Model
However, the cars must stay at the gravity roads. From time to time they can move to other highway by using bridges and branches, but in general they have to stay at the road at any given moment.
Therefore, could it be that the SMBH has no real effect on the velocity of a star which is located far away in one of those roads and there is no real need for dark matter to keep the Sun in its orbital cycle?
Hence, the stars can orbit at fairly constant speed (depending on their location in the gravity road) without any issue for winding problem.
Do you agree with that?

5

New Theories / Sun motion in the galaxy V.S Moon Motion in the solar system

« on: 20/04/2018 18:30:54 »

Please look at the following motion of the Sun in the galaxy:

http://www.biocab.org/Motions_of_the_Solar_System.jpg

http://www.biocab.org/Coplanarity_Solar_System_and_Galaxy.html

It has a swing motion of 15Km/s - 20Km/s onward and backward to/from the galactic center.
And it also has a swinng motion of 5Km/s - 7Km/s upward and downward from the galactic disc.
It looks as a motion of a spring or a screw.
Why is it?

For Up Down it is stated that this bobbing motion is due to the galactic disc gravity.
However, I couldn't find any real answer for the onward and backward motion to/from the galactic center.
Some might think that it just represents a normal elliptical orbit (Perihelion/Aphelion). However, in a real Kepler orbit, there is only one Perihelion and one Aphelion per one cycle.
The Sun sets four Perihelion/Aphelion cycles in order to complete just one cycle around the center of the galaxy.
Therefore, it is quite clear the those four Perihelion/Aphelion cycles can't be represented by any sort of elliptical orbit.

So, Let's compare it to the moon orbit
http://www.answering-christianity.com/moon_s-shaped_orbit.gif
The moon motion is mainly onward and backward to/from the Sun.
But it is also moving up and down from the Earth/sun disc.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/moon_s-shaped_orbit_around_earth_1.jpg

Therefore, we see that as the moon orbits around the Sun, it also sets the two swing motions:
1. onward and backward
2.  upward and downward.

The main difference is the ratio in the amplitude of those two swings.
The swing motion ratio in the Sun is:
Tan X = 7/20 = 0.35
X = 19 Degrees
Hence, technically if the Lunar Plane (moon/Earth orbit disc) was 19 Degrees from the Earth/Sun disc, we should get the same Swing ratio as the Sun does while it orbits around the center of the galaxy.
Conclusions:
With regards to the moon orbits around the Sun:
The moon orbits around the Earth/moon center of mass. This center of mass orbits around the Sun.
If the Earth was Invisible, and we were standing in a nearby solar system, we could see that the Moon Swing motions around the Sun is similar to the Sun swing motions around the center of the galaxy. (but not at the same amplitude and ratio).

Hence, with regards to the Sun Orbits around the center of the galaxy:
After all of this introduction, why can't we assume that the Sun orbits around some local invisible center of mass, and this local center of mass orbits around the center of the milky way?

This Motion is critical.
Based on this motion we can solve the enigma of Spiral galaxy without any need for dark matter.

6

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Why might stars and planets be ejected from the Milky Way galaxy disc?

« on: 19/04/2018 08:33:03 »

Why stars and planets are ejected out from the Milky Way galaxy disc?

Please see the following:

phys.org/news/2012-03-runaway-planets-fraction.html

"Seven years ago, astronomers boggled when they found the first runaway star flying out of our Galaxy at a speed of 1.5 million miles per hour."

"New research shows that the answer is yes. Not only do runaway planets exist, but some of them zoom through space at a few percent of the speed of light - up to 30 million miles per hour."

7

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / What is the radius of the accretion Disc in the Milky Way Galaxy?

« on: 14/04/2018 09:48:43 »

What is the radius of the accretion Disc in the Milky Way Galaxy?