Gravity vs. EM in Galaxies So now the quasar orbit has become a one-way trip, CC? Or does it take a few yoyo oscillations before the magnetic field is strong enough to expel the quasar from the galaxy? Nick, Charles acknowledges electric and magnetic forces to account for the motions within the galactic arms. And now on the issue of quasars he's saying that gravity gets stars moving out from the galactic center, but magnetic forces become stronger after a spell and then prevent the quasars from returning to the galactic center. I think you agree that gravity accounts for motions of objects within the galactic center and even here in the solar system. Don't you? Although Charles, Mathis and maybe others are thinking that magnetic forces are involved in keeping planets orbiting the Sun.
Star Formation in Electric Filaments? Charles, did you read what I posted from Carlqvist and Verschuur at the EU Theory Debate thread at http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&~? Verschuur seems to have found that molecular clouds within the galaxy are actually parts of linear electric filaments, rather than nebula-like molecular clouds for the most part. Doesn't this help support the theory that electric discharges can cascade from single electron motion to increasingly larger discharges that could trigger in nearby denser nebulae nebula-wide giant lightning and implosion?
I'd also like to see if we can pin down whether or not electric discharges can actually bring atoms together to form clumps of matter, such as chondrules, like the one abstract claimed. If that's the case, it could also fit into your nebular im/explosion cycle theory. I posted on that thread some of the material that Hoz posted before which makes statements about discharges pulling matter into clumps. Now I want to follow those kinds of leads. I looked up one of the links he provided on CIV, critical ionization velocity, and plan to look for anything relevant there.
I guess you may not know any more about ball lightning than I do, but have you read or thought much about it? The features that I've heard about are that they're very lightweight and very bright, around a foot in diameter, they float or bounce lightly along electric lines or down aisles in airplanes or along the ground, they can penetrate windows without damaging them, they often end by exploding and they're somewhat dangerous. Thornhill had theorized that they're balls of neutrinos, which would explain how they could penetrate windows etc. I think he also speculated that globular cluster stars are large-scale ball lightning.
Here's a quote about ball lightning penetrating windows etc from http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf085/sf085g13.htm. The majority of these balls entered through closed glass windows. Sometimes the balls penetrated the windows without damaging the glass at all, but in a few cases neat circular holes were somehow melted or punched through the glass. The accompanying photograph illustrates an incident in which lightning (supposed to be ball lightning) surgically excised a coin-like piece of glass. [The caption says:] Window glass with a 7-centimeter hole fitting glass circle believed to have been created by ball lightening. [The glass circle shows some cracks.]
Gravity Depth _Gravity must be more than a surface phenomenon. Otherwise, moons and asteroids above a certain volume and density would not become globular, I think. But what about the supposed low density of comets, even though they appear to be solid rock? Do their low densities mean that the law of gravity isn't accurate? Or do electrical forces on comets throw off the gravity-mass calculations?
Quasar Size _Why are there no dense celestial objects larger than quasars? How dense are tokamaks? Is there anything to prevent dense objects from getting larger than quasars? _Following is the image of a quasar in front of a galaxy. One website shows the galaxy there having the following measurements. And the article on an Intrinsic Redshift Mechanism says if the quasar is near the galaxy and if the galaxy is 300 Mly away, the quasar must be about 1,000 ly in diameter. That's about a million times larger than red giant stars. Could that mean that conventional calculations of galactic distances overestimate by 6 orders of magnitude? Or could quasars as starlike objects be that large? I'd like to compare that quasar with others, but it's hard to find their diameters.
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/images/041001quasar-~ _Oct 01, 2004 Quasar in Front of Galaxy _NGC 7319 Magnitude: 14.4 Size (mins): 1.7' x 1.3' Distance: 356 Million Light Years Diameter: 176,000 Light Years http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0608164.pdf - 16 Aug 2006 A Proposed Mechanism for the Intrinsic Redshift and its Preferred Values Purportedly Found in Quasars Based on the Local-Ether Theory _Ching-Chuan Su Department of Electrical Engineering National Tsinghua University Hsinchu, Taiwan _From the HST image given in (Galianni et al. 2005), the angular diameter of the quasar quite close to the nucleus of NGC 7319 is estimated to be 0.7 arcsec. _It is widely accepted that the distance of NGC 7319 from the Earth is about 300 million light-years (Wikipedia).If this quasar is indeed physically close to the galaxies and of that distance, then the physical diameter of this quasar will be about 1000 light-years. _For molecular clouds in an interstellar space, the concentration varies from 10^9 to 10^12 atoms per cubic meter (Wikipedia). _This amounts to a density ranging from 3.4×10^−18 to 3.4×10^−15kg/m^3, as the particles are molecular hydrogen. _Optical spectra indicate that quasars contain heavier atoms or ions [and] probably contain dust as well. _Anyway, a quasar should be denser than an interstellar gas. _This is because the star formation is difficult to initiate without a denser gas and, on the other hand, most of the gas will be depleted after the completion of star formation. _Suppose the quasar close to NGC 7319 has a density of 6×10^−11 kg/m^3. _Owing to its size, the total mass of the quasar will be as large as 2.7×10^46 kg. _For comparison, the mass of the Sun and of the Milky Way are 2×10^30 and 10^42 kg, respectively. _It is noted that for such a massive quasar the Schwarzschild radius, given by Rs = 2GM/c^2, is much greater than its radius, while its density is very low. _Based on the local-ether theory, a Schwarzschild radius being greater than the radius of an object implies that on the surface of the object, the gravitational potential is so strong that Φg> c^2/2 and hence the gravitation-induced intrinsic redshift z >0.414. _Then suppose that the material of the gas cloud together forms a local ether associated with the quasar. _Thus the gravitational potential on the surface of the quasar, when normalized to c^2, is Φg/c^2 = 4.2. _Although this potential is extraordinarily strong, the gravity of acceleration on the surface of such a massive quasar is less than one percent of that on the surface of the Earth. _Then, according to the redshift formula, the emission from or absorption by atoms or ions placed near the surface will have a gravitational redshift of z = 2.07.This value is close to the observed redshift of z = 2.114. _A better agreement can be reached simply with a slight adjustment in the size or density. _On the other hand, suppose another quasar has a lower redshift of z = 0.06 and a larger diameter of 3000 light-years. _Thus the normalized gravitational potential Φg/c^2 0.06 and the density is as low as 10^−13 kg/m^3. _For comparison, the normalized gravitational potential on the surface of the Earth is about7×10^−10 and that on the surface of the Sun is about 2×10^−6. _For the two cases in the solar system, the gravitational redshift is very small. _Thus, based on the ejection model and the local-ether theory, the wide variation in redshift can be ascribed to a variation in density and size of the gas cloud, which in turn can be due to the strength of initial ejection from the parent galaxy, to the speed at which the cloud moves away from the galaxy, to the gas expansion, to the fragmentation of gas clouds, and to the star formation. As the size and density tend to vary widely, it seems that redshifts of quasars vary in a random way. _However, from an analysis of about 600 quasars it has been found that the redshifts tend to have some preferred values and thus the distribution of the redshifts exhibits some preferred peaks (Karlsson 1977). _Further, these peaks were found to correspond to a geometric series in (1+z). _That is, the peaks are related by the Karlsson formula (Karlsson 1971)
_This abstract at http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?1996ApJ...4~The Apparently Normal Galaxy Hosts for Two Luminous Quasars says this. _HST images (with WFPC2) of PHL 909 (z = 0.171) and PG 0052+251 (z = 0.155) show that these luminous radio-quiet quasars each occur in an apparently normal host galaxy. The host galaxy of PHL 909 is an elliptical galaxy (˜E4), and the host of PG 0052+251 is a spiral (˜Sb). Both host galaxies are several tenths of a magnitude brighter than L*, the characteristic Schechter luminosity of field galaxies. _The images of PHL 909 and PG 0052+251, when compared with HST images of other objects in our sample of 20 luminous, small-redshift (z ≤ 0.30) quasars, show that luminous quasars occur in a variety of environments. The local environments of the luminous quasars range from luminous ellipticals to apparently normal host galaxies, to complex systems of interacting components, to faint (and as yet undetected) hosts. _The bright H II regions of the host galaxy of PG 0052+251 provide an opportunity to measure directly the metallicity of the host of a luminous quasar, to establish an upper limit to the mass of the nuclear AGN (i.e., the putative black hole source), and to test stringently the cosmological hypothesis that the galaxy and the quasar are both at the distance indicated by the quasar redshift. _The moderately luminous host galaxies of PHL 909 and PG 0052+251 are obvious on the HST images. Normalizing the limits of detectability using short exposures in which the host galaxies of PHL 909 and PG 0052+251 are easily observed, we estimate that we could have detected similar host galaxies as faint as 0.5 magnitudes less than L* in the longer exposure HST images that have not yet shown host galaxies. The details of the PSF subtraction are unimportant for the determination of the host galaxy morphologies and luminosities; the major and minor axes measured by subtracting very different stellar PSFs are the same to ±5% and the host galaxy magnitudes are the same to ±0.1 mag.
Galaxy Mashup Yields An Awesomely Violent Binary Quasar http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/02/galaxy-mashup-~ _M31_xray_ir Astronomers have found the first clear evidence of a binary quasar within two actively merging galaxies. Quasars are the extremely bright centers of galaxies surrounding super-massive black holes, and binary quasars are pairs of quasars bound together by gravity _"This is really the first case in which you see two separate galaxies, both with quasars, that are clearly interacting,"
Astronomers locate a miniature quasar in Andromeda http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/12/astronomers-locate-a~ The orbiting XMM-Newton X-ray observatory discovered XMMU J004243.6+412519, a bright X-ray source in M31 in January 2012. Later, the object flared to a peak luminosity greater than 1032 Watts. For reference, the Sun's luminosity is 3.8×1026 Watts, including all types of light. In other words, this object emits roughly a million times the energy of our Sun in X-rays alone. If that wasn't enough, this particular microquasar was 10 times brighter than any other known object in M31.
The Quasar That Built a Galaxy http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2009/12/01-02.html astronomers observed a small companion galaxy, only about 22,000 light-years away, whose new stars are being formed at an extremely rapid clip. One of the quasar's jets is aimed directly at the galaxy, and the team thinks it's likely that the jet is driving the star-making process by blasting matter into the galaxy. The astronomers also found that HE0450-2958 and this companion are slowly moving toward each other. Within a few million years, both quasar and galaxy will have merged. That may explain why some quasars are surrounded by galaxies: the galaxy didn't form the quasar; rather the quasar pulled in the galaxy.
Lloyd
Re: CC's Theory Debate
Quasar Diameters 1,000 LY Charles, as discussed in the previous message I found that the quasar by galaxy NGC 7319 may be up to 1,300 ly in diameter. Now I found another set of quasar diamters by galaxy M82 appear to be over 600 ly. I explain how I worked that out in this message: http://qdl.scs-inc.us/?top=4741-4752-8673.
