So if not a black hole, then what?

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby allynh » Fri Apr 12, 2019 11:18 am

HA! This from xkcd, showing the size comparison of the "photograph" to our solar system.
m87_black_hole_size_comparison.jpg

M87 Black Hole Size Comparison
https://xkcd.com/2135/

We are probably looking down the throat of a galactic z-pinch!
allynh
 
Posts: 919
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Fri Apr 12, 2019 11:28 am

I can accept the idea that we're looking down the throat of M87. but we should be looking at the side of the accretion disk of the object at the center of our own galaxy. Why would we even expect to see an event horizon from the object at the center of our galaxy?
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:21 pm

allynh wrote:We are probably looking down the throat of a galactic z-pinch!

But where is the plasma beam?
The beam that stretches a few galaxies.
Why is this very high energetic phenomenon invisible in the picture?
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby allynh » Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:29 pm

Michael Mozina wrote:Why would we even expect to see an event horizon from the object at the center of our galaxy?

I posted a number of links in 2017 that talks about the so called "Black Hole" at the center of the Milky Way. They looked at the center, saw the stars orbiting something, and declared it a "Black Hole" simply because they could not see anything in the center.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1579&start=60#p119739

They were using actual optical telescopes to see the center of the Milky Way, not playing games with radio telescope data.

If it had been an actual "Black Hole" we would have seen the accretion disk glowing in the infrared.

Zyxzevn wrote:Why is this very high energetic phenomenon invisible in the picture?

Remember, this is data of a region, not a "picture".

Based on the scale that xkcd was drawing, the plasma beam would be cropped from the data, the same way that they crop quasars from a picture so you can't see that it is connected to a near by galaxy.
allynh
 
Posts: 919
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Solar » Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:54 pm

Michael Mozina wrote:I can accept the idea that we're looking down the throat of M87. but we should be looking at the side of the accretion disk of the object at the center of our own galaxy. Why would we even expect to see an event horizon from the object at the center of our galaxy?


There is no such thing as an "accretion disk". That is a gravitation-based characterization (aka "in-falling" onto something) based on the observation of "gas & dust" being evacuated ("drawn into") the opening, or "mouth", of a "Circumnuclear Disk".

Neither is that an "event horizon". It is a feature of plasma electrodynamic interactions.

Here, in the Milky Way, this has been studied at some length as several of the links on that Google page will reveal. The Circunuclear Disk is (for all intents and purposes) tightly wound torus (constrained) via electric and magnetic fields and has prodigiously high ionization of molecular hydrogen occurring there. The "dust & gas" are contributions (by-products) being scavenged from within the galaxy as stars "exhale" their various "winds". One does not "expect" to see an "event horizon" when observations of the actual Circumnuclear Disk (the bright ring of Sag A*) has had so much coverage in the literature already.

It is confusing to use nomenclature from gravitational astrophysics: "infalling", "event horizon", "black hole" etc in conjunction with trying to understand what one is looking at within plasma physics i.e. "torus", "evacuation", "phase-space holes" etc. They are not compatible because the nomenclature of each field references different causes (gravity only v/s electric and magnetic fields and electric currents). NOTHING in space is "falling" for there is neither "Up" nor "Down" in order that the characterization of "falling" is appropriate.

As explained in the following paper (there are others of course) The Circumnuclear Disk ionizes. That is why it glows so brightly resulting in the formation of a torus. One does *not* refer to, or go looking for, an Ionizing Circumnuclear Disk (nor any other ionizing astrophysical disk) as a gravitational "event horizon".

H3+ Spectroscopy and the Ionization Rate of Molecular Hydrogen in the Central Few Parsecs of the Galaxy- Goto, M. et al. J.Phys.Chem

Per previous post, and in line with what Member Allynh has assessed note also that the epitome (or apex) of this supposed “black hole” image, including its ill-named “event horizon”, were graphically represented as an picture-icon in the upper left-hand corner of an Special issue on high field laser-plasma interactions. It’s been sitting there in all of its regal glory representing both the torus (circumnuclear disk) and emerging “beams” garnered from plasma lab experiments.

The very same image, (again in the upper left-hand corner) but with darker background, representing this aspect of laser-plasma interactions has also been sitting on the Conference website apparently since sometime in 2018.

Those plasma experiment based images correlate with what is outlined in the smaller white box of Chandra Wide Field. They both show "Torus" and "Jet". One image is from laser-plasma interactions in the lab, the other from M87.

Now, all of a sudden, gravitational astronomy garners an image of M87 that reveals a formation consisting of three different 'structures' (torus, opening, and tube) already known to exist within in the physics of Plasma Interactions and ... something new occurred?? :shock:

No; it did not. What has occurred is that the recent images of M87 STILL reveal 'structures' and formations already known to exist in Plasma Electrodynamics particularly with regards to creating "beams" with lasers directed at a target.

Zyxzevn wrote:
allynh wrote:We are probably looking down the throat of a galactic z-pinch!

But where is the plasma beam?
The beam that stretches a few galaxies.
Why is this very high energetic phenomenon invisible in the picture?


(M87) As you know astrophysics has been manipulating, removing, and/or recoloring light data to process images for decades.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1360
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Fri Apr 12, 2019 1:23 pm

allynh wrote:
Michael Mozina wrote:Why would we even expect to see an event horizon from the object at the center of our galaxy?

I posted a number of links in 2017 that talks about the so called "Black Hole" at the center of the Milky Way. They looked at the center, saw the stars orbiting something, and declared it a "Black Hole" simply because they could not see anything in the center.

https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/php ... 60#p119739

They were using actual optical telescopes to see the center of the Milky Way, not playing games with radio telescope data.

If it had been an actual "Black Hole" we would have seen the accretion disk glowing in the infrared.

Zyxzevn wrote:Why is this very high energetic phenomenon invisible in the picture?

Remember, this is data of a region, not a "picture".

Based on the scale that xkcd was drawing, the plasma beam would be cropped from the data, the same way that they crop quasars from a picture so you can't see that it is connected to a near by galaxy.


Hmmm. Well, "Powehi"in M87 looks like it has an accretion disk, and looks about like I'd expect it to look if I was staring down the barrel of the accretion disk. If however I'm looking sideways at the accretion disk (Milky Way), I might expect to see nothing but an accretion disk band and maybe some evidence of Birkeland currents shooting out the poles.

I don't see any obvious jets in any of the images of M87 and it definitely has them. Perhaps we don't see them in radio waves because they have a peak radiation at much higher energy wavelengths?
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby folaht » Sat Apr 13, 2019 2:26 am

I'd like to understand more specifically what it actually is in the picture, regardless of how they processed the image.

And dumb it down for the unelectrically minded.


I'm a layman like you, so as a computer programmer I can only tell what I know from scouring the internet.

Others, correct me if I'm wrong.

The "picture" is a zoomed in picture of this picture below:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/M87_jet.jpg

It zoomed into the bright white spot.

The hazy stuff and bright white spot are all stars that make up a so-called elliptical galaxy.
The galaxy is called M87 and it's the largest galaxy in the Virgo cluster and the Virgo supercluster.
We are in the Milky way / Local Group / Virgo supercluster.

Image

---

The black hole "picture" was made by putting several "pictures" put together done by radio telescopes.
It is not an optical picture. It's done with radio waves.

An optical picure does not show any dark spot as you can see below:

https://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/displace-m87-1.jpg


Since black holes are supposed to reside in the center of galaxies, our milky way is also studied:

You see an animation of the center below:

https://youtu.be/dv1igzE-aX4?t=2044

And this is what it makes me think of:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixk4Q-vCiks
Since 1 % 1, 1 * 1 and 1 - 1 do not add up, we must conclude that 1 + 1 is 3.
folaht
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 9:38 am

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Webbman » Sat Apr 13, 2019 4:48 am

Zyxzevn wrote:For fun:
Image
Also explains the "smoke trail"
Case solved!


i have to say that is my favorite explanation.
We shall know them by their works
Webbman
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby neilwilkes » Sat Apr 13, 2019 7:16 am

Webbman wrote:
Zyxzevn wrote:For fun:
Image
Also explains the "smoke trail"
Case solved!


i have to say that is my favorite explanation.


Mine too - I love it, and would like to repost that elsewhere....would this be okay>?
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.
User avatar
neilwilkes
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Sat Apr 13, 2019 8:41 am

neilwilkes wrote:Mine too - I love it, and would like to repost that elsewhere....would this be okay>?

Sure. I did not create it myself.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby nigma46 » Mon Apr 15, 2019 2:10 am

If radio interferometry cannot produce an 'image', is that equivalent to MRI 'images'?

i.e. Are MRI 'images' also not images?
nigma46
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 7:53 am

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Webbman » Mon Apr 15, 2019 4:24 am

the issue is that they are a specific frequency. Not all objects emit those frequencies.

so the plasma ( the ring) might be "visible" to the detector because it emits the appropriate radio frequency, but the core might not emit that frequency or even that em band depending on its energy.

i.e you wouldnt use a cell phone camera to detect gamma rays and then conclude the part that wasnt detected was a black hole (cell phones dont detect gamma rays).
We shall know them by their works
Webbman
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Mon Apr 15, 2019 5:15 am

More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Solar » Mon Apr 15, 2019 6:03 am

Webbman wrote:the issue is that they are a specific frequency. Not all objects emit those frequencies.

so the plasma ( the ring) might be "visible" to the detector because it emits the appropriate radio frequency, but the core might not emit that frequency or even that em band depending on its energy.

i.e you wouldnt use a cell phone camera to detect gamma rays and then conclude the part that wasnt detected was a black hole (cell phones dont detect gamma rays).


Exactly

The Chandra Wide-Field image is basically the Earth equivalent of an angled view into the eye-wall of a funnel cloud in cosmic plasma for which no light is reflected from the inner wall.

1-Funnel Cloud

2-Funnel Cloud

Here is another ballistic version as Zyxzevn has shown:

Bullet through Glass

Check out the animated movies from: M87 VLBA Movie at 43 GHz

You can tell where this will go in the future. The Circumnuclear Disk of M87 will be observed over the years and as the bright spots move around the plasma torus and change in ionization intensity the activity will be summed up as M87's "black hole is feeding" (or consuming) - take your pick.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1360
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Mon Apr 15, 2019 6:33 am


This gave me the idea:
What if the particles are actually going faster than light?
(Neutrinos anyone?)
It would give an enormous shock-wave.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests