Sep 26, 2008
Misplaced Mavericks
Why do stars in the Sun's local neighborhood vary in
their chemical composition? They should all be products of
the same nebular cloud.
In a recently
published paper, scientists from the University of
Washington described a newly created
computer simulation that might provide support for the
conventional theory of galaxy formation. For many years
astronomers have devoted resources to the question of why
the stars nearest the Sun do not share the same chemical
makeup.
The Milky Way
galaxy is currently thought to contain almost a trillion
stars in orbit around a common center of gravity. As with
all other galaxies, it is theorized to have condensed out of
a "nebular cloud" thousands of light-years in extent with a
more-or-less homogeneous blend throughout—only minor
variations in its elemental composition are supposed to have
existed. Hydrogen, helium, and some trace elements in the
form of micro-fine dust are said to have clumped together,
organizing into a great whirlpool-like structure that
started spiraling inward due to gravitational influence.
As the gas and
dust continued to condense, eddies formed in the
gravitational vortex, crushing the material together into
extremely hot, dense spheres. When the temperature and
pressure reached a critical point, hydrogen fusion reactions
ignited at the cores of the new stellar orbs and the
galactic disk began to shine.
Because the
initial cloud was theoretically undifferentiated overall,
other stars in proximity to the Sun should all be cut from
the same cloth and contain similar chemical constituents.
However, surveys of the nearest 6000 stars reveal that they
are all very different from one another: some with more
helium than their ages will allow, some with more iron than
they should have, and other compositional oddities that
could not previously be explained.
Stars are said
to age according to a well-established process that involves
consumption and fusion. Hydrogen fuses into helium and
helium into heavier elements until the nuclear fuel is
exhausted through radiative output and the star implodes,
throwing off its outer layers. More massive stars collapse
into neutron stars, while stars that are less massive
gradually darken into cool, red shadows of their former
glory. Therefore, a star's age is determined by its
temperature and luminosity, so the Sun's stellar companions
are all thought to be different ages. In fact, they are
supposed to vary in age to such an extent that astronomers
think they were not even born in the same place or at the
same time.
The new computer
simulation was constructed to model the hypothetical
evolution of a galactic disk over its multi-billion year
lifespan. Astronomers have found that the simulation
produced stellar movements that seem to indicate the Sun and
other stars could have been born far from where they are
currently located. This might account for the discrepancy in
their blend of elements and why many of them appear to be
traveling along paths that are more elongated than they
"should be."
The proposed
solution is that the spiral arms of the Milky Way appear and
disappear as it changes over the eons of its existence.
Stars like the Sun take about a million years to complete
one revolution around the center of the galaxy, and during
that time they might have felt a push or a pull from one or
another of the arms. If the spiral arm happened to be ahead
of the star at a close enough distance, then it might have
imparted a gravitational pull, accelerating it into a
higher, more elongated orbit farther away from the galactic
center of gravity. Conversely, if the star travelled ahead
of a spiral arm, it might have been pulled from behind into
a lower orbit.
Previous Picture of
the Day articles have taken exception to most of the
theories set forth by the scientific consensus. Galactic and
stellar evolution due to accretion and gravity-only models
of compaction, thermonuclear furnaces in stellar cores,
age-relevant data compiled from stellar brightness and
color, and gravitational acceleration by congregations of
loose-knit spiral arms have all been vigorously opposed by
the electric model of stars and galaxies.
According to
consensus theory, the "stellar main sequence" is a chart of
what happens to stars over long periods of time. No
information about the electrical input or output of stars is
considered when the various conventional theories are
debated. By not bringing the electrical interaction of stars
with their galactic environment into the picture, an entire
line of investigation is never considered. Astronomers and
other specialists are not mapping the
current flow through space in order to determine its
influence on stellar evolution. Because of that oversight,
they constantly overstate the gravitational model of the
cosmos.
Retired
professor
Dr. Don Scott wrote that the absolute brightness of a
star depends on the strength of the current density
impinging into its surface, along with the star's diameter.
As current density increases the star becomes hotter and
brighter, glowing bluer and whiter. If the current flow into
the star decreases, the star becomes red and cools down. So
using magnitude and color to determine a star's age is a
false premise.
Anthony Peratt,
in his particle-in-cell simulations of plasma reactions, has
demonstrated that galaxies are not formed by rarified wisps
of gas and dust gradually falling into their own gravity
wells. His models of galactic evolution reveal that
electrically conductive plasma is able to create the
shapes of spiral galaxies without resorting to
gravity-specific influences. Peratt's work with high-energy
electric discharges indicates that the composition of stars
in galaxy evolution is due not to where they were born, but
to how they were born.
In plasma
cosmology and cosmogony, the stars are created in the
compression zones of galaxy-spanning Birkeland currents.
Such currents actually draw charged material along their
filaments from across vast distances in space. As two (or
more) filaments begin to twist around one another because of
the long-range attractive force, the z-pinch effect crushes
the interstellar plasma into galaxy-shaped masses.
In consideration
of the work done by Don Scott and Anthony Peratt, the
variations in stellar chemistry as well as their velocity
differences are more probably explained by the plasma
hypothesis. It is the electrical forces that are active in
space and not the gravitational shuffling of locations that
causes the differences among the stars.
By Stephen Smith
___________________________________________________________________________
Please visit our
Forum
The Electric Sky
and The Electric Universe
available now!