Thunderblog - Donald E. Scott
home     thunderblogs     forum     picture of the day     resources     team     updates     contact us
 
 

Incorrect Assumptions in Astrophysics II

08/09/08

On June 1, 2008 Michael Gmirkin wrote a Thunderblog entry entitled Incorrect Assumptions in Astrophysics. In it he put forward a strong indictment of astrophysicists who base their scientific conclusions on poorly substantiated assumptions. A prime example is their wide acceptance of the ‘high redshift value equals distance’ principle. Even though this idea stands on scientifically shaky grounds Halton Arp’s evidence has challenged it, if not completely falsified it the astronomical power structure believes this to be a Law of Nature. Gmirkin correctly points out that this false ‘Law’ is responsible for numerous disastrous misinterpretations of observed astronomical data.

Another equally unsubstantiated assumption made by present day astrophysicists is that galaxies that are relatively close to each other (and have interconnecting bridges of matter) must be colliding. We presently have no way to measure the relative motions of any such galaxies. Any two neighboring galaxies could therefore equally well be flying apart from each other. The automatic knee-jerk declaration that ‘ interacting means colliding’ is simply a presumption. It is an error in logic a non sequitur.

Ultraluminous Infrared Galaxies
Figure 1. ULIRGs giving birth.
And, as Michael Gmirkin pointed out previously,
they are not really ULTRA luminous at all.

Astronomers have no bona fide reason to assume two closely spaced galaxies have to be approaching each other in the process of colliding other than their stubborn belief that every action in cosmic space is controlled solely by gravity. Gravity only attracts. Thus they are prejudiced in favor of an attractive force pulling the two into a collision.

A quick Internet search reveals an attitude of absolute certainty. For example:

The National Optical Astronomy Observatory News, 12/6/2005, reported as follows:

“More than half of the largest galaxies in the nearby universe have collided and merged with another galaxy in the past two billion years, according to a new study using hundreds of images from two of the deepest sky surveys ever conducted.”

The Wikipedia entry for Interacting Galaxies says:

“Colliding galaxies are common in galaxy evolution. Due to the extremely tenuous distribution of matter in galaxies, these are not collisions in the normal sense of the word, but rather gravitational interaction. Colliding may lead to merging. This occurs when two galaxies collide and do not have enough momentum to continue traveling after the collision. Instead, they fall back into each other and eventually merge after many passes through each other, forming one galaxy. If one of the colliding galaxies is much larger than the other, it will remain largely intact after the merger; that is, the larger galaxy will look much the same while the smaller galaxy will be stripped apart and become part of the larger galaxy.”

These paragraphs are entirely conjectural.

  1. We have no evidence that “more than half of the largest galaxies in the nearby universe have collided and merged with another galaxy in the past two billion years.” On the contrary, we have been inundated by Big Bang pronouncements that everything in the universe is getting farther and farther apart not closer together.

  2. We have never actually seen galaxies evolve. The detailed process of how galaxies change over time is total supposition.

  3. Colliding may lead to merging.” It might also lead to explosive dissipation might it not?

  4. [Merging] occurs when two galaxies collide and do not have enough momentum to continue traveling after the collision.” This is a baseless pronouncement implying the writer has complete knowledge of this process and is explaining it to us.

  5. If one of the colliding galaxies is much larger than the other, it will remain largely intact after the merger.” Again this is a pompous declaration and it carries almost no information. If two masses collide and one is bigger, of course it will be the smaller one that gets distorted more. (This is why people buy Humvees.)

This same Wikipedia entry also defines “Galactic cannibalism”:

“Galactic cannibalism refers to the process by which a large galaxy, through tidal gravitational interactions with a companion, merges with that companion, resulting in a larger, often irregular galaxy.”

This is stated as fact as if this term described some kind of verified actual existing process that we have “often” observed. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

If, as EU theorists believe, galaxies form in strings along vast intergalactic current streams, then a pair of neighboring galaxies would interact in a way similar to a pair of Birkeland currents. When they are widely apart they attract each other. When they move closely together, they repel each other. This is a well documented characteristic of Birkeland currents as observed in the laboratory.

We hear the following from the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) group when they presented the images shown in figure 1:

“Hubble astronomers conducting research on a class of galaxies called ultra-luminous infrared galaxies (ULIRG) have discovered that over two dozen of these are found within ‘nests’ of galaxies, apparently engaged in multiple collisions that lead to fiery pile-ups of three, four or even five galaxies smashing together.”
[Emphasis added]

These people seem to have a fixation on violence and disaster. In view of Halton Arp’s observations and scientific papers, what we are most likely seeing is the riotous birth of galaxies and quasars, not their deaths in ‘fiery pile-ups’. Instead of witnessing collisions, we are looking at the separation of parent and offspring.

How can an unbiased person look at the images in figure 1 and not see ‘fireworks’? These scenes are most probably the festive birth of new proto-galaxies, quasars, and BL Lac objects.

  • For a man who only has a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

  • For astronomers who only have gravity, everything looks like a disastrous smash-up.

  • Gravity only attracts Electromagnetic forces can attract and repel.

  • Astronomers need another tool in their toolbox.

D. E. Scott

 

 

Permalink to this article.

Public comment may be made on this article on the
Thunderbolts Forum/Thunderblogs (free membership required).

For an overview of Don Scott's book please visit: The Electric Sky


Donald E. Scott
Dr. Donald E. Scott is a retired Professor of Electrical Engineering and long-time amateur astronomer.

My Archives

Chronological Archives

Archives by Author

Archives by Subject

Thunderblogs home




 
SUBSCRIBE
 
  FREE update -

Weekly digest of Picture of the Day, Thunderblog, Forum, Multimedia and more.
 

E-BOOK
 
 

An e-book series
for teachers, general readers and specialists alike.
 

VIDEO FAVORITES
(FREE viewing)
 
  Thunderbolts of the Gods

 
 
  Symbols of an Alien Sky

 

MULTIMEDIA
 
  Our NEW Multimedia page explores may diverse topics not traditionaly covered by the Thunderbolts Project.  

PREDICTIONS
 
  Follow the predictions of the Electric Universe.  

 
[ top ]
 
Disclaimer - The opinions expressed in the Thunderblog are those of the authors of
the material, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Thunderbolts Project.
The linking to material off-site in no way endorses such material and the Thunderbolts
Project has no control of nor takes any responsibility for any content on linked sites.
thunderbolts.info
home     thunderblogs     forum     picture of the day     resources     team     updates     contact us