"Black Holes" Two-way electric circuits?

[earls]

Consider this article:

http://www.universetoday.com/2009/01/05 ... lack-hole/

When current flows into the galactic core, you get new stars, brighter output...

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/20 ... s-ago.html *

When current slows out from the galactic core you get jets.

The behavior is dictated by the galactic electromagnetic field moving through another larger electromagnetic field with varying densities and size of fields of opposite charges that either push or pull energy into the core of the child EM field.

Extended periods of irregular push/pull shapes the galaxy, each reversal of the field twisting and untwist its magnetic field.

I guess a galaxy with opposing arms would need two counter-flowing currents; "Birkeland currents"?

[junglelord]

"The black hole was a million times brighter three centuries ago."

They must be mad, mad I tell you....

[earls]

Hah. My favorite line was: "Perhaps it’s just resting after a major outburst."

JUST TAKING A BREATHER THAR

[jjohnson]

Let's calculate the force (acceleration) of gravity on a protostar 7 LY from a 400 million solar mass "black hole", and see how affected this region is by the black hole lurking nearby. In easy steps:

let r = 7 LY = 6.62237 x 10^16 m 1 solar mass = 1.99 x 10^30 kg, so black hole = 4 x 10^6 sols = 7.96 x 10^36 kg

let the mass of the protostar be (arbitrarily) 2.5 solar masses, or 4.98 x 10^30 kg

Alleged value of the gravitational constant, G, is about 6.7428 x 10^-11 Nm²/kg²

The force F, in Newtons, is G(m1 x m2) ÷ r² or [(6.7428 x 7.96 x 4.98) x10^(30+36-11)] ÷[ 4.3856 x 10^33]

F = 6.03 x 10^23 N 6 bazillion fig Newtons sounds like a huge force so let's turn it into the acceleration on the protostar by dividing F by the protostar's mass (remember F = ma?) : (6.03 ÷ 4.98) x 10^(23-30) = 1.21 x 10^-7 m/s/s, which is 0.000121 mm/s/s. This is not a very high acceleration rate, folks! 1.23 x 10-8 g is about a hundred-millionth of a gravity. Rip my face off with that!!

Someone check my math. Someone else check how long it will take that protostar to bonk up against the black hole's event horizon! My guess is that the black hole would be sucking up a planetary nebula by then. -Or else a passing star in the "crowded" inner galactic region (maybe one of the other two nearby protostars according to the article) would have given it a slight nudge and it escapes the clutches of the black hole altogether.

Do they even do the math? Why shouldn't a star be able to form in that low a gravity field?

Especially if it is nearly totally controlled and evolves under electromagnetic forces in the Birkeland currents' Z-pinch to begin with?


If you want to read another reason, besides Crothers', as to why a singularity is not either a mathematical nor a physical possibility read Miles Mathis here: http://milesmathis.com/loop.html

[earls]

"Why shouldn't a star be able to form in that low a gravity field?"

To counter-build on that, why would a star form in a high gravity field?

[Lloyd]

* Although he's generally a little over my head, I like Mathis's stuff. Have you seen his explanation of calculus in simple terms. I get the drift of his explanation there, but I haven't taken the time to understand it well.

[jjohnson]

I only posed the question, why couldn't stars form in this low a gravity field? because I was questioning their math assumptions about these stars' being in some sort of disruptively strong gravity field from the 400 million solar mass junkpile which they claim is there. 7LY is a long way from ANY gravity source. No, I don't believe gravity forms stars. Nor do I think it tears them up or runs them into one another, either. In over 30 years of casual reading and the last couple years' intensive reading I have never seen a claim of evidence of or observation of a stellar collision. Probably the best theoretical (I mean theatrical) treatment was Science Fiction American's article about what would happen if a white dwarf star plowed through our sun. That was so good that Jack McDevitt used it in the opening scenes of his SF novel Polaris. There might be some re-use for cosmological theories after all...

[mharratsc]

JJ said:

F = 6.03 x 10^23 N 6 bazillion fig Newtons sounds like a huge force so let's turn it into the acceleration on the protostar by dividing F by the protostar's mass (remember F = ma?) : (6.03 ÷ 4.98) x 10^(23-30) = 1.21 x 10^-7 m/s/s, which is 0.000121 mm/s/s. This is not a very high acceleration rate, folks! 1.23 x 10-8 g is about a hundred-millionth of a gravity. Rip my face off with that!!

Excuse me while I laugh myself a hernia...


Mike H.