Black Hole Volcanoes

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.
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:24 am

Black Hole Volcanoes

Unread post by BeAChooser » Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:51 am

Articles like this make me wonder if reporters (or is it mainstream scientists?) are even literate these days … ... udy-finds/
Telescope reveals ‘volcanic eruption’ of gases oozing from black hole
How’s that for a title? “Gases” “oozing”? In a “volcanic eruption”? Well, the article indicates that the lead scientist in the study being reported said the “gas bubbles” “accelerated by the black hole” “create spectacular mushroom-shaped structures, rings and filaments that are similar to those originating from a powerful volcanic eruption on planet Earth.” Ok. But I hope it was the reporter who added that part about “oozing”. But, clearly, these *scientists* do seem to confine their understanding of what they see out there in space to only the processes we see in air and water … in other words, non-ionized gases. That's a serious problem.

Here’s more from the article:
While observing the black hole, researchers also discovered thin gas filaments sometimes as long as a million light-years that move at the speed of light.
At the speed of light? Really? Surely the scientists didn't say that (and notice there were no quotes around that phrase in the article) so maybe the reporter just made a mistake. But the reporter does claim (due to his use of quotes) that the scientists wrote or said this ... “many pairs of gas bubbles diverse in age, some unknown filaments of magnetic fields and relativistic particles in special relativity as big as hundreds of thousands of light-years.” My problem is that I can't make heads or tails of the part I put in red? Plus, what’s meant by “unknown filaments”?

All this made me curious enough to go read the original paper in Nature: . And sure enough, I didn’t find the second sentence in the paper at all. Nor did I find any mention of anything moving “at the speed of light”. So either the authors said that to the reporter in an interview they may have gave … or the reporter wrote gobbledegook because the reporter knows so little about what he’s reporting. But then I found this article: ... actic.html authored by the Universita di Bologna, the university where the study was done. And sure enough, it contains the second sentence, word for word. So we can’t blame the courthousenews reporter for writing gobbledegook. In fact, it appears that reporter just plagiarized most of the article. Odd thing for a “court reporter” to do, don’t you think? And, by the way, the article also says that “These observations brought about other unexpected discoveries: thin gas filaments as long as a million light-years made of particles moving at approximately the speed of light.” So that’s where the court reporter got his other statement from too, after dropping the unimportant (in his mind) “approximately”. :roll: Well, it could have been worse. The court reporter could have written this article: ... s-erupting , where “gaseous bubbles from black holes can burst, leaving behind filaments that seem to come from a smoking volcano” and the image shown is that of a volcano at night with lava flowing down it’s slopes. Is it any wonder that the average person knows so little about science these days?

But in any case, right off the bat in the abstract of the Nature article, a gaggle of *scientists* (the list of authors) tell us that “active-galactic-nuclei jets inflate cosmic-ray lobes, which can rise buoyantly as light ‘bubbles’ in the surrounding medium.” So apparently, they do think that what’s out there behaves like material in a gas or water medium only under thermal and gravity forces. They write “[T]he AGN is currently inflating new bubbles of radio-emitting plasma.” Like air. Or water. No mention of electromagnetic phenomena, other than the plasma being "radio-emitting". As to why it's radio emitting, they obviously haven't a clue.

But even worse, while they note that the existence of “a complex array of filamentary radio-emitting structures” some 200 kpc from the center of the galaxy group, they totally fail to see the obvious when they then say the “filaments” “often show sharp bends and double strands”. And one look at the image of the filaments the scientists studied around Nest2000047, in the courthousenews article: ... -final.png (for some reason I can’t show images on this forum), suggests that almost every filamentary structure around the galaxy group comes in a pair. So let’s see … radio emitting, double-stranded plasma filaments with sharp bends. Hmmmm. What does that remind you of, folks? Birkeland filaments perhaps? Well not to these *scientists*.

No, they conclude that “the presence of many thin two-filament structures” is “consistent with a partially turbulent medium”. Ah yes … that old *catch-all*, *turbulence* explanation … that they use to explain ANYTHING they don’t understand. However, they then admit that “the fact that the bubbles and filaments have managed to maintain their integrity over a travelled distance of 100-200 npc and timescales of hundreds of Myr might challenge the presence of a turbulent IGrM. One could expect indeed that the observed narrow filaments (with h ~ 2-10 kpc) should have been destroyed by random, turbulent motions”. “Should have”, but then they offer another gnome (of course) to explain away this discrepancy. They conclude “magnetic fields might be playing a major role in the stability of the tori bubbles” … without every explaining where those magnetic fields came from or how they do it. *Frozen-In*, I suppose. :roll:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests