[Bored chemist]

You fully accept that the bar arm (and spiral arm) are made out of stars that are bonded by gravity force.

Only in the same way that a swarm of flies is "bonded" by the air around them.
If you just wait a while you will see that they become separate.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

You fully accept that the bar arm (and spiral arm) are made out of stars that are bonded by gravity force.

Only in the same way that a swarm of flies is "bonded" by the air around them.

Thanks
You compare the stars in the bar arm and the spirals arms to swarm of flies.
We clearly see that all the stars in the bar arm are bonded in shape of a two propeller arms, but you claim that we are just lucky to see them all together in this shape.
Therefore this bar is just a temporary structure that should break down very soon.
In the same token, the spiral arms should break soon
However, do you know that about 70% of the 400 Billion galaxies in the visible Universe are spirals?
Hence, out of any three galaxies in the entire universe about two are spirals.
Based on your understanding, all millions over billions spiral galaxies with their bars are there as we are so lucky that exactly when we open our eyes and look upwards in the sky we suddenly see them all with that unique propeller bar and spirals arms.
What a lovely understanding.
As you compare the stars in the bar/spirals arms to swarm of flies, what is the chance that when we observe a fly it should come with a swarm of flies in a shape of propeller?
How many times during your life time did you observe that kind of propeller'  or spiral stracture based on swarm of flies?
Is it one million times one thousand times or just zero?

If you just wait a while you will see that they become separate.

Based on your understanding, how long do we have to wait until the bar would break down as the swarm of flies breaks down sooner or later?
One day, one year, One Million years, one billion years or just indefinitely?

If you see a bird flying in the air, why don't you claim that it is just swarm of flies in the air?
How long do we have to wait until you would confirm that it is a real bird and not swarm of flies?
Again: One second, One day or also indefinitely?

So long as you don't get the impression that they behave like some kind of single, solid object.

Can you please explain why the bars are always at the inwards side of the ring while the spirals arms are always at the outwards side of the ring?
As you believe that the arms are there just by chance, then why that chance can't set the spirals inwards and the bar outwards?
Why we can't see even just one spiral galaxy with opposite arms in the entire universe?

Could it be that you have a severe mistake?
We clearly see the unique shape of the Bar/spiral at almost any spiral galaxy.
That bar/spiral arms maintains its shape exactly as the bird maintains its shape.
We can claim that the bird is a temporary structure as it has a limited life time and it also changes it shape during the limited live time frame.
As the bird isn't made out of swarm living cells that are just there by chance, the bar/spiral isn't made just of swarm of stars that also are just there by chance..
Therefore, as we all agree that the bird is a temporary structure made out of living cells that are bonded to each other, then why can't we understand that the bar/spiral is also one structure made out of billion stars that are bonded to each other.

If the bar/spiral was made out of stars that aren't bonded to each other (Like swarm of flies), then don't you agree that at some point this bar structure should break down as any swarm of flies breaks down at some point of time.
So, how could it be that we observe Millions and billions spirals galaxies with their fixed structure of bar?
Why the bar/spiral looks as a very stable structure?
How could it be that we have never ever observed any bar as it breaks down?
Are you sure that all of those millions or billions bars are there just by a pure chance?

There is no chance in the shape of a bird and there is no chance in the shape of the Bar or spiral arm.

[Kryptid]

Can you please explain why the bars are always at the inwards side of the ring while the spirals arms are always at the outwards side of the ring?

I don't know.

As you believe that the arms are there just by chance, then why that chance can't set the spirals inwards and the bar outwards?
Why we can't see even just one spiral galaxy with opposite arms in the entire universe?

I never said they were there by chance.

That bar/spiral arms maintains its shape exactly as the bird maintains its shape.
We can claim that the bird is a temporary structure as it has a limited life time and it also changes it shape during the limited live time frame.
As the bird isn't made out of swarm living cells that are just there by chance, the bar/spiral isn't made just of swarm of stars that also are just there by chance..
Therefore, as we all agree that the bird is a temporary structure made out of living cells that are bonded to each other, then why can't we understand that the bar/spiral is also one structure made out of billion stars that are bonded to each other.

False analogy. The structure of a bird is far more rigidly bound than the stars in a galaxy is. The stars in a galaxy are constantly moving relative to each other. The "bond" by gravity is significantly more loose. It would be better to liken the spiral shape of a galaxy to the spiral shape of a hurricane. Hurricanes aren't spirals just by chance either, but they also aren't solid, unchanging structures.

You calim that the Bar and the spiral arms are there just by chance.

I never said that.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 14:37:20
You calim that the Bar and the spiral arms are there just by chance.

I never said that.

So what is the correct answer?

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 14:37:20
Can you please explain why the bars are always at the inwards side of the ring while the spirals arms are always at the outwards side of the ring?

I don't know.

This is the most important question about the spiral galaxy.
I can promise you that if you would accept the idea that the Bars, Rings and spiral arms are made out of billions stars that are locally bonded by gravity to each other - you would know the answer for this question.
So, would you kindly give me the possibility to use this understanding of local gravity bonding?
Local gravity bonding in the bar, Local gravity bonding in the arm and local gravity bonding in the spiral arms.

You know that the dark matter isn't perfectly OK but you believe in that idea as this is currently the best offered theory.
So why do you refuse to accept much better theory that can answer any question that we might have?

[Bored chemist]

but you claim that we are just lucky to see them all together in this shape.

If you look closely, you will see that I never said that.

Why did you make it up?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

False analogy. The structure of a bird is far more rigidly bound than the stars in a galaxy is. The stars in a galaxy are constantly moving relative to each other. The "bond" by gravity is significantly more loose. It would be better to liken the spiral shape of a galaxy to the spiral shape of a hurricane. Hurricanes aren't spirals just by chance either, but they also aren't solid, unchanging structures.

Actually, the bird is made out of molecules that are bonded together.
Even in a tinny bird there are billions of molecules.
Spiral arm is much bigger than a bird (about 50,000 LY), but it also has billions of stars.
So, technically the relative distance between the billions molecules in the bird to its size, could be quite similar to the distance between the stars in the spiral arm to its size.
The "bond" by gravity is strong enough to hold orbital objects for billions years.
Therefore, even if gravity bond is more loose than the molecules bond, it is still strong enough to hold the billion stars in that arm structure for billions of years.
Hence, we can't compare the spiral arm to hurricane as there is no real bonding between the gas in that hurricane.

Based on the following idea from BC:

Only in the same way that a swarm of flies is "bonded" by the air around them.

It seems to me that the gas in hurricane are "Bonded" as swarm of flies are "Bonded".

[Dave Lev (OP)]

but you claim that we are just lucky to see them all together in this shape.

If you look closely, you will see that I never said that.

So please, what kind of force could hold the spiral arm or the bar for millions and billions of years?

[Kryptid]

So what is the correct answer?

To what question?

I can promise you that if you would accept the idea that the Bars, Rings and spiral arms are made out of billions stars that are locally bonded by gravity to each other - you would know the answer for this question.
So, would you kindly give me the possibility to use this understanding of local gravity bonding?

I don't really get what you're asking. Yes, they are bonded, in a sense, by gravity. It's temporary and dynamic, though. The stars don't all stay in place relative to each other over time.

You know that the dark matter isn't perfectly OK

Says who?

So why do you refuse to accept much better theory that can answer any question that we might have?

Because your idea can't explain why stars are orbiting faster than they should be. Dark matter can.

Even in a tinny bird there are billions of molecules.

A huge underestimate, actually.

So, technically the relative distance between the billions molecules in the bird to its size, could be quite similar to the distance between the stars in the spiral arm to its size.

It's not even remotely close. If the Sun was 1 millimeter across, the closest star (Proxima Centauri) would be over 29 kilometers away. If a water molecule was 1 millimeter across, then, on average, another water molecule would only be about 1.15 millimeters away from it. So the distances aren't comparable at all.

Hence, we can't compare the spiral arm to hurricane as there is no real bonding between the gas in that hurricane.

I was using the hurricane as an analogy for the dynamic nature of the spiral shape of the galaxy. A hurricane changes as it rotates, just as a galaxy does.

[Origin]

So please, what kind of force could hold the spiral arm or the bar for millions and billions of years?

For maybe the 20th time in this thread, gravity.

[Bored chemist]

but you claim that we are just lucky to see them all together in this shape.

If you look closely, you will see that I never said that.

So please, what kind of force could hold the spiral arm or the bar for millions and billions of years?

Gravity.
Specifically, the gravity of rather more mass than is visible.
So we know there's some mass there that we can't see.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 17:06:39
I can promise you that if you would accept the idea that the Bars, Rings and spiral arms are made out of billions stars that are locally bonded by gravity to each other - you would know the answer for this question.
So, would you kindly give me the possibility to use this understanding of local gravity bonding?

I don't really get what you're asking. Yes, they are bonded, in a sense, by gravity. It's temporary and dynamic, though. The stars don't all stay in place relative to each other over time.

Well, as long as you confirm that the stars are bonded by gravity to the arm, that is perfectly OK.
Please be aware that gravity works locally and orbital objects don't stay at the same radius for indefinitely.
Let me use the following example:
We think that the Moon orbits around the Earth, but in reality it orbits around a common center of mass with the Earth. Let's call this point as ComE.
This ComE orbits around a common center of mass with the Sun. Let's call this point as ComS
Therefore, we already see two stages of gravity bonding.
Hence, while the moon is bonded locally with ComE and this comE is bonded with ComS, then although the moon orbits locally around a common center of mass, it goes wherever the Sun goes.
In the same token, we can claim that each star in bonded locally to a center of mass that is integrated in the arm and it goes wherever the arm goes.
I agree with you that gravity bonding is dynamic and temporary.
Therefore, even in the solar system we know that there is a migration of planets and moons. Therefore, it might take few years or even few Billion years to change/break the gravity bonding but it can't last indefinitely
Therefore, we can claim that the while each star is bonded locally to the arm, this structure is dynamic and temporary.
In any case, please consider (or try to consider) each arm as a long line of stars that are bonded to each other by gravity.
Therefore:
Ring - The Ring is a long line of stars that are bonded to each other by local gravity. It is located at 3KPC from the Center.
Spiral arm - The spiral arm is a long line of stars that are bonded to each other by local gravity. It is bonded by gravity to the ring at 3KPC from the Center and it goes all the way to 15KPC. At the base (ring) its thickness is 3000LY while at the edge its thickness is 400LY.
Bar - The bar is a funneling element arm that collects the stars from the Bulge and funnels them into the spiral arms and the ring.
That is the base for spiral galaxy understanding.

Because your idea can't explain why stars are orbiting faster than they should be. Dark matter can.

Please be aware that as the moon is bonded at a second gravity bonding with the Sun, it doesn't need to explain its orbital motion around the Galaxy. It just goes wherever the Sun Goes.
Therefore, there is no need for dark matter to explain the Moon motion around the galaxy at it is the task of the Sun.
In the same token, the Sun doesn't need to explain its orbital motion around the galaxy. It just goes wherever the arm goes.
Therefore, there is no need for dark matter to explain the Sun motion around the galaxy at it is the task of the spiral arm.

Now we need to understand how the arms in spiral galaxy really works and why the Bar shape is always inwards to the ring while the spiral arms are always outwards.

[Kryptid]

Please be aware that as the moon is bonded at a second gravity bonding with the Sun, it doesn't need to explain its orbital motion around the Galaxy. It just goes wherever the Sun Goes.
Therefore, there is no need for dark matter to explain the Moon motion around the galaxy at it is the task of the Sun.
In the same token, the Sun doesn't need to explain its orbital motion around the galaxy. It just goes wherever the arm goes.
Therefore, there is no need for dark matter to explain the Sun motion around the galaxy at it is the task of the spiral arm.

No, that doesn't work. You don't get to cheat Kepler's third law like that. As I said before, the arms are not solid, rigid objects. That has important consequences for this. Go back and take a look at the graph of galactic orbital speeds. A star orbiting halfway out from the galactic center orbits at about the same speed as one at the outer edges of the galaxy.

So what happens when you look at two such stars in the same spiral arm? In order to complete one orbit around the galaxy, the one that is twice as far out has to travel twice as far to complete one orbit. But both stars are orbiting at the same speed. So if we wait long enough for the innermost star to complete one orbit, the outermost star has only completed half an orbit. In other words, they are now on opposite sides of the galaxy. So they are no longer in the same spiral arm and thus we can safely conclude that the spiral arm does not just drag stars around as a single, rigid unit. The only way that would work would be if the outermost star orbited at twice the speed of the innermost star (which it quite clearly does not).

[Dave Lev (OP)]

No, that doesn't work. You don't get to cheat Kepler's third law like that.

Would you kindly explain what is the problem with  Kepler's third law?

As I said before, the arms are not solid, rigid objects.

That message is correct for any orbital system that is bounded by gravity.
We know that planets and moons migrate in the solar system.
Therefore, would you consider the solar system as a solid/rigid system or as a temporary system?

Go back and take a look at the graph of galactic orbital speeds.

OK
This is the graph
https://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/thompson.1847/1101/RotCurve2.gif

A star orbiting halfway out from the galactic center orbits at about the same speed as one at the outer edges of the galaxy.

That is correct and it is a perfect explanation for the Bar.

So what happens when you look at two such stars in the same spiral arm? In order to complete one orbit around the galaxy, the one that is twice as far out has to travel twice as far to complete one orbit. But both stars are orbiting at the same speed. So if we wait long enough for the innermost star to complete one orbit, the outermost star has only completed half an orbit. In other words, they are now on opposite sides of the galaxy. So they are no longer in the same spiral arm and thus we can safely conclude that the spiral arm does not just drag stars around as a single, rigid unit. The only way that would work would be if the outermost star orbited at twice the speed of the innermost star (which it quite clearly does not).

Yes, your explanation is perfectly OK.
However, with your permission let's ignore the spiral arm and focus on the bar.
As I have stated, your following explanation is perfectly OK for the Bar:

In order to complete one orbit around the galaxy, the one that is twice as far out has to travel twice as far to complete one orbit.

Please look at the orbital velocity at the bar:
https://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/thompson.1847/1101/RotCurve2.gif
We clearly see that the velocity increase linearity.
Therefore at 3KPC is about 200 Km/sec while at 1.5 KPC the velocity is 100 Km/sec.
So it fully meets your explanation that "the one that is twice as far out has to travel twice as far to complete one orbit" and therefore, its orbital velocity should be twice.
Hence, there is full correlation between the exactions to the observation.
Therefore, we can consider the bar as some sort of a temporary structure that keeps its shape.
A star at a distance 2R would travel twice faster than a star that is located at R.
So far so good.
I will explain the orbital velocity of the spiral arm once the orbital velocity of the bar is clear.

[Kryptid]

Would you kindly explain what is the problem with  Kepler's third law?

Go back to that graph you posted. The red line is what Kepler's third law predicts if there was only normal matter in the galaxy. Since your model posits that there is only normal matter, then your model also predicts that red line. What we have is the green line instead. So your model is wrong.

That message is correct for any orbital system that is bounded by gravity.
We know that planets and moons migrate in the solar system.
Therefore, would you consider the solar system as a solid/rigid system or as a temporary system?

The Solar System obeys Kepler's third law (unlike your proposal). The Solar System is extremely minute compared to the galaxy, so the distances from the center of the galaxy to the Sun, Moon and Earth are all practically the same. As such, their orbital velocities around the galaxy are also practically the same and they have to travel about the same distance to make one orbit about the galaxy. That's not even remotely true for a collection of stars in a spiral arm, which span over many, many thousands of light-years.

Yes, your explanation is perfectly OK.

Then you should realize that your claim of the stars pulling each other along as one unit in the spiral arm is wrong.

As I have stated, your following explanation is perfectly OK for the Bar:

Except what I said applies to the whole galaxy, not just the bar.

A star at a distance 2R would travel twice faster than a star that is located at R.

Not further out in the Milky Way, which is where the rotation curve anomaly is. Those stars travel at the same speed, not twice the speed.

[Bored chemist]

Therefore, would you consider the solar system as a solid/rigid system or as a temporary system?

Well, sometimes the Earth and Mars are on the same side of the Sun; sometimes they are on opposite sides.
Does that sound like a solid to you?

In the longer term, we know it's not stable.
This guy pointed that out over 100 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Poincar%C3%A9#Three-body_problem

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 12:41:30
As I have stated, your following explanation is perfectly OK for the Bar:

Except what I said applies to the whole galaxy, not just the bar.

Dear Kryptid
Why our scientists refuse to understand that there is an order in spiral galaxy.
It has Bulge, Bar, Ring, and the spiral arms.
There are 400 billion galaxies in the Universe and 70% of them are spiral galaxies.
Therefore, why they ignore the real meaning of this unique structure?
Those galaxies do not lie. They tell us their real story in by their shape.
You have already confirmed that you don't know why the Bar is always in the inwards side of the ring while the spiral is always in the outwards side of the ring.
Do you really care about the Bulge, Bar, ring, spiral arms shape?
If you care about it then you should know that the current theories can't give real answer for all of them. So why do you lock yourself when it comes to a possibility to get full understanding about this shape?

Go back to that graph you posted. The red line is what Kepler's third law predicts if there was only normal matter in the galaxy. Since your model posits that there is only normal matter, then your model also predicts that red line. What we have is the green line instead. So your model is wrong.

well, the red line is a perfect example for the severe mistake of our scientists.
They see a star in the spiral arm and they think that it should hold itself by its own gravity to the center of the galaxy.
In other words - they totally ignore the impact of the arm.
I have proved that when the star is bonded to the Bar arm there is a perfect fit between your calculations to the observation.
Why do you ignore that prove which is based on your calculation???
Our scientists have decided that the star must orbit by itself around the galaxy.
As it can't do so, they add this dark matter imagination which can't explain the full structure of the spiral galaxy.

The Solar System is extremely minute compared to the galaxy, so the distances from the center of the galaxy to the Sun, Moon and Earth are all practically the same. As such, their orbital velocities around the galaxy are also practically the same and they have to travel about the same distance to make one orbit about the galaxy.

Sorry, I don't agree with that
As the moon orbits around a common center of as with the Earth (or ComE) while this ComE  orbits around the Common center with the mass, it is clear that the moon covers longer distance than the Sun for one orbital cycle around the galaxy.
Therefore, by definition its orbital velocity should be higher than the Sun (even if that increase is quite neglected).

Please see the orbital path of the moon as it orbits around the sun:

Do you think that kepler law can work directly between the Moon - Sun orbital cycle while the moon is wobbling?
Don't you agree that the answer must be  - NO.
In the same token, the sun orbital path around the galaxy is very similar to the moon orbital path around the Sun as it also wobbling.
https://www.thedailystar.net/news-detail-205023
That wobbling path proves that there must be one more stage of gravity bonding. The bonding to the spiral arm!!!
As the moon orbits around a common center of mass that is called ComE before that comE orbits around the Sun, then the Sun must also orbit around some sort of center of mass in the arm before it orbits around the center of the galaxy.
Our scientists hope that the sun is just wobbling around the galactic plan and totally ignore the real meaning of the wobbling observation
Don't you agree that it is a SEVERE mistake from our scientists to expect that the sun orbit directly around the center of the galaxy while it wobbling?
That wobbling motion of the Sun proves that kepler law doesn't work between the sun to the center of the galaxy.

[Kryptid]

Why our scientists refuse to understand that there is an order in spiral galaxy.

Who ever said they did?

Therefore, why they ignore the real meaning of this unique structure?

Who said they were?

Do you really care about the Bulge, Bar, ring, spiral arms shape?
If you care about it then you should know that the current theories can't give real answer for all of them.

Can you quote a scientist on that?

So why do you lock yourself when it comes to a possibility to get full understanding about this shape?

I'm not. What I'm "locking" myself from are ideas that break the laws of physics.

Sorry, I don't agree with that

Then you don't agree with science.

As the moon orbits around a common center of as with the Earth (or ComE) while this ComE  orbits around the Common center with the mass, it is clear that the moon covers longer distance than the Sun for one orbital cycle around the galaxy.

Because it's orbiting more than just the galactic center. It's also orbiting the Sun and the Earth.

Therefore, by definition its orbital velocity should be higher than the Sun (even if that increase is quite neglected).

Its average orbital speed around the galactic center, specifically, isn't. You'd have to average the total speeds at all points in the Moon's orbit to get that.

Do you think that kepler law can work directly between the Moon - Sun orbital cycle while the moon is wobbling?
Don't you agree that the answer must be  - NO.

No, I do not agree.

Our scientists hope that the sun is just wobbling around the galactic plan and totally ignore the real meaning of the wobbling observation

Says who?

Don't you agree that it is a SEVERE mistake from our scientists to expect that the sun orbit directly around the center of the galaxy while it wobbling?

No.

That wobbling motion of the Sun proves that kepler law doesn't work between the sun to the center of the galaxy.

No, no it does not prove that. Kepler's third law still works just fine so long as you factor in extra gravitational influences (such as the ones that cause the Sun to wobble).

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 21:19:28
As the moon orbits around a common center of as with the Earth (or ComE) while this ComE  orbits around the Common center with the mass, it is clear that the moon covers longer distance than the Sun for one orbital cycle around the galaxy.

Because it's orbiting more than just the galactic center. It's also orbiting the Sun and the Earth.

Please look again in the following image:

Do you confirm that the total distance that the moon cross per one year is bigger than the distance that the Earth cross per one year?
Yes or no please.
As the answer must be yes, do you confirm that the moon must move faster than the earth in order to accomplish a longer distance per year?
In the same token, do you agree that while the sun isn't moving at all the earth must orbit around it.
Therefore, while the sun orbits around the galaxy center the earth must cover longer distance than the Sun?
Hence, in one orbital cycle of the sun around the galactic center the Earth covers longer distance than the sun, while the moon covers longer distance than the earth.
Don't you agree that longer distance per a given time frame means faster velocity?
Therefore why do you refuse to understand that the average velocity of the Earth must be faster than the Sun, while the average velocity of the moon must be faster than the Earth?
So, why do you claim the following:

Its average orbital speed around the galactic center, specifically, isn't. You'd have to average the total speeds at all points in the Moon's orbit to get that.

If you mean that the average velocity of the moon is the same as the sun while they orbit around the galactic center - then this is a violation of real science.

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 21:19:28
That wobbling motion of the Sun proves that kepler law doesn't work between the sun to the center of the galaxy.

No, no it does not prove that. Kepler's third law still works just fine so long as you factor in extra gravitational influences (such as the ones that cause the Sun to wobble).

Sorry, this is a severe violation of kepler law.
The real meaning of that "extra gravitational influences (such as the ones that cause the Sun to wobble)" is that the Sun orbits around some common center of mass, while that common center of mass orbits around the galactic center.

I'm not. What I'm "locking" myself from are ideas that break the laws of physics

The Sun wobbling movement proves by 100% that the Sun orbits around some sort of common center of mass in the spiral arm.
As long as you lock yourself from that key understanding, you and all the science comunity won't understand how the spiral galaxy really works!!!

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 21:19:28
Do you really care about the Bulge, Bar, ring, spiral arms shape?
If you care about it then you should know that the current theories can't give real answer for all of them.

Can you quote a scientist on that?

You have stated that you don't know why the Bar is always in the inwards side of the ring while the spiral arms are always in the outwards side of the ring.
You all claim that the gravity with the dark matter can form the full starcture of the arms (bar, ring and spiral).
So please tell me how your invented formula for the dark matter can force all the 100% of the billions spiral galaxies in the entire universe to set always the bar in the inwards side of the ring while the spiral arms are at the outwards side?
As long as you can't answer this question - then your current theory is just useless!
Sorry, our science community totally ignore key elements in the spiral galaxy observation and therefore, they don't have even a basic clue how it really works.

[Kryptid]

Do you confirm that the total distance that the moon cross per one year is bigger than the distance that the Earth cross per one year?

Yes.

As the answer must be yes, do you confirm that the moon must move faster than the earth in order to accomplish a longer distance per year?

On average, yes.

In the same token, do you agree that while the sun isn't moving at all the earth must orbit around it.

The Sun is moving.

Therefore, while the sun orbits around the galaxy center the earth must cover longer distance than the Sun?

Yes.

Don't you agree that longer distance per a given time frame means faster velocity?

Yes.

Therefore why do you refuse to understand that the average velocity of the Earth must be faster than the Sun, while the average velocity of the moon must be faster than the Earth?

It depends on what kind of orbital speed you are talking about. The overall speed is higher, yes, but the Earth and Moon both take the same amount of time to go around the Milky Way as the Sun does. The reason is because they spend a lot of their time going in circles due to being in orbit. So even though their overall speed is higher than that of the Sun, their average speed around the galactic center is the same.

If you mean that the average velocity of the moon is the same as the sun while they orbit around the galactic center - then this is a violation of real science.

See above.

Sorry, this is a severe violation of kepler law.

Do you know what Kepler's third law is?

The real meaning of that "extra gravitational influences (such as the ones that cause the Sun to wobble)" is that the Sun orbits around some common center of mass, while that common center of mass orbits around the galactic center.

And?

The Sun wobbling movement proves by 100% that the orbits around some sort of common center of mass in the spiral arm.
As long as you lock yourself from that key understanding, you and all the science comunity won't understand how the spiral galaxy really works!!!

I never denied that. What I deny is your proposal that normal matter has enough gravity to make stars move faster in orbit than they are supposed to. That breaks Kepler's third law.

So please tell me how your invented formula for the dark matter can force all the 100% of the billions spiral galaxies in the entire universe to set always the bar in the inwards side of the ring while the spiral arms are at the outwards side?

Ask an astrophysicist.

As long as you can't answer this question - then your current theory is just useless!

There you go again, assuming that I, an individual moderator on a discussion board, am the be-all-end-all of modern scientific knowledge about galaxies...

Sorry, our science community totally ignore key elements in the spiral galaxy observation and therefore, they don't have even a basic clue how it really works.

It's better than yours, which breaks the laws of physics.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Dear Kryptid
Did you set the the following calculation for a solid arm?

As I said before, the arms are not solid, rigid objects...
So what happens when you look at two such stars in the same spiral arm? In order to complete one orbit around the galaxy, the one that is twice as far out has to travel twice as far to complete one orbit.

Do you reconfirm that in a solid arm "the one that is twice as far out has to travel twice as far to complete one orbit."
Yes or No, please?
Do you confirm the Bar arm meets your calculation for solid arm?
So, as the Bar arm looks solid, Behave solid & meets you calculation for solid arm by 100%  - then why do you claim that it can't be solid?
Are you sure that only astrophysicist can approve this observation?

Ask an astrophysicist.

Hence, if that astrophysicist would tell you that the Bar arm is solid as it fully meets the calculation for solid arm - would you believe him?
So where can we find that astrophysicist?
If one day you would find his address, please ask him to call.
We need him.

One more question;
If one day as you go out from your home, you observe something that looks like a lion.
It  has a body of a lion, a head of a lion a voice of a lion a smell of a lion and it run and jump as a lion directly to your location.
What would you do?
1. As you had been informed by the experts that there are no lions in your city,  you would assume that it is just a swarm of flies that only looks like a lion. Therefore you would stay where you are and hope that those flies would escape from this lion structure.
2. Call the expert (this time it can't be astrophysicist) to get his advice if this structure represents real lion.
3. Run for your life.
Please take your time. You still have few more second before the impact.