Starship Asterisk*

kovil,

I'm afraid I haven't got any more advice to offer without seeing what the computer is doing in person. Good luck figuring it out. By the way, any files that are saved with a .htm extension should be openable by both firefox and internet explorer, unless they were originally something else. If neither is working, there may be something bigger up with your computer, so you may want to find a computer support forum.

Bevy is a good one.

Hello All

Naming a group of black holes


The Swarm
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap050128.html

What do you call a group of black holes ... a flock, a brace, a swarm? Monitoring a region around the center of our Galaxy, astronomers have indeed found evidence for a surprisingly large number of variable x-ray sources - likely black holes or neutron stars in binary star systems - swarming around the Milky Way's own central supermassive black hole

Bevy of Black Holes Found in Galaxy Cluster
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/b ... 20913.html



===================================

Smile,,,,,,,my friend just said a Gang Bang,,,,,,,,,,,,terrible joke.

iamlucky,

Yes I am using Mozilla Firefox for the browser over Windows 98.
Unluckily tho, it overwrote all my files and any saved emails, it now sends me to the mailbox and won't open the emails ! The original email is there, it shows for a split second and then it goes to the mailbox homepage screen. Is there a way to fix this?? I tried uninstalling firefox, but then I can't open any files at all, all saved web pages are inaccessible as well as emails. So I reinstalled it. But even trying to save emails in the old explorer 5 , it now says, can't save the web page. Is there a way to unwrite the files so they will open if I uninstall firefox? I couldn't find anything on their website that looked like it would address the problem. The files are all titled .htm ; I'm not sure what they were titled before.

It sounds like gravitational "rubber-banding" from just the visible stars masses is insufficient to explain their speed. There's probably only a few dozen or hundred solar masses visible, yet their motion suggests they are being held in their orbits by the gravity of million or so solar masses.

Kovil, it sounds like your web browser spellchecking. If you have the current version of Firefox or Opera I believe both have a built in spellchecker.

Quarks walking the Planck. I like it.

and all those stars are still orbiting something as the original post states. Is it possible these stars are gravitationally "rubberbanded" together without a black hole in the orbital center, very much like kids in a merry-go-round " ?

How about a "A Stay of Black Holes" or "A Quagmire of Black Holes"

Most likely "A Cluster of Black Holes" like Globular Clusters.

"A Calcutta of Blackholes, by any other name would remain
as inscrutable as dark night without a flame. . . " Radilex of Rigel V


Hi makc ,

The regular apod box has red underlining of misspelled words. It doesn't know apod is a word yet ! It's amazing how many words I misspell. m-w.com is a regular bookmark. No problems. Although I've had more than one long typing session disappear into cyberspace never to be seen again, so I do use W97 for some things and then save it and then transfer it into the dialog box. Or early-post it and then do several edits to add more, and insure not losing it. The thought for the day is ;

It's time to make those little quarks walk the planck , eh matey, arrrgggghhh,
into the cauldron of sub-lepton stew with ye , arrgghh har har har !

jan 28, 2005 apod , a group of black holes orbiting a supermassive blackhole might be termed ;

an abhorance of blackholes,

a nullification of blackholes,

an invisible darkness of blackholes .

or the defining SagA* propinquity fortissimo ;
a quincunx of blackholes !

ps Harry,

< Dating of stars does not take into consideration recycling and changes that stars under go that effect the dating process. >

I have given up trying to date stars, they are so egotistical and think the universe revolves around themselves, that's why I moved back to NV from Los Angeles, CA.

But seriously, LOL, now I forgot what the main idea was. more later.

hey kovil sounds like you were editing your post in word processor,a nd then pasted it here; well, I restored your link, but all "red underlining" has gone.

Interesting

Hello Kovil

Sometimes our journey is controlled by the tracks made by others.

Imagine there are no tracks, allow no theories to enter your logic.

Work with the parts and bring it together.

Star formation and how stars go through varies cycles of nova and supernova and still look like our sun.

How millions of mini black holes 5 to several hundred sun masses spread out through the Milky Way.

How swarm of very large black holes near the centre

How a black hole several million times that of our sun lives at the centre.

How the galaxy rotates, how long does it take.

How long does it take to form a spiral galaxy.

==========================================

You are right I do not think the Milky Way is 13.7 Gyrs old.
There is no evidence to show this.

Dating of stars does not take into consideration recycling and changes that stars under go that effect the dating process.
==========================================

Regardless what I think,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,if you are able to date the Milky Way
or take up the challlenge. It may take several years.

Harry, In reading some back posts of makc's sky map posting (here), I didn't realize you suspect our galaxy is over 13.7Gyr ! Same-page-itis here !

So my problem is I can not use the mainstream calculations and methodology to derive my answers, or I will make the same mistakes they did. It is a process of starting at the beginning, (begining has 3 n's in it?! , my underlined red chagrin) fie on the wretched spelling ! full speed ahead !!

I'm in a multilevel quandary over where to pull the first thread that will unravel this mystery and not be making a tight knot in the tangle to begin with.

A retro into being a consummate Teleologist for this max endeavour !

Talley Ho !


ps - as an intrinsic teleologist that is.

BBT is so often an extrinsic teleologistical exercise these days, it is losing credibility big time.

The actual word I wanted was for the philosophical discipline that explores the question of "How is it, that we know, what we think we know, without errors."
but google can't answer that one ! nor m-w.com
I thought it was teleology, has the definition changed since the '60's ?
Maybe our professor specialized the definition.

Hello All

The elements

All the elements upto Iron are formed during the life time of the star (our sun) by the process within. The elements seperate into layers Iron around the core and Hydrogen and Helium near the surface.

The heavier elements are formed during a supernova. Just googls and you will find the process.

Just before the supernova

Iron is broken down by fission to Helium, high energy photons released by the inner core of the star.

The inner core has a critical mass that holds it together and controlling the heat loss to the solar envelope. Once this control is out of control high energy photons are realeased and the same time it loses the hold on to the solar envelope allowing it to further expand.

The Iron layer that took billions of years to form, surrounds the outer core and in a very short time undergoes a chain reaction forming Helium to neutrons, if suffiecient neutrons are formed a neutron star compact core is formed, if not there is a total supernova leaving no core no star.

If there is enough mass a possible black hole maybe formed from the over supply of neutrons that change the temp and increase of strong forces between the subatomic particals, breakig down neutrons to quarks to preon particals creating a high density degerated matter that prevents light from escaping.

<<<<How long would it take for our neighborhood to become as dusty with heavy elements as we notice we have? That gives an age clue, then is there any mechanism that would clear some of that and leave the lighter elements for new stars to form from, and maintain the level of heavy elements we see? In this way our age could be considerably more than currently thought. >>>

good question- I need to ruminate this one for a few days before I say something that would reveal my ignorance to a whole bunch of people. It is possible for elements of " different weights " to coexist but gravity would segregate and coalesce into substances. Hydrogen and helium are considered metals but try welding hydrogen with a helium rod. Answering your question is like preparing a lesson plan. An ice cold one would help. The assumption that heavy elements came from an event predating our sun and in the vicinity is not supported as "stuff " permeates the entire universe and is dispersed everywhere. I am hoping a chunk of gold from Eta Carinae hypernova will land in my backyard.

Hi Wolf,

I don't mean to sound argumentative or combative, tone of voice doesn't come thru the keyboard well at times. I use the word nova too loosely most of the time, sorry.

How long would it take for our neighborhood to become as dusty with heavy elements as we notice we have? That gives an age clue, then is there any mechanism that would clear some of that and leave the lighter elements for new stars to form from, and maintain the level of heavy elements we see? In this way our age could be considerably more than currently thought.

It might work oppositely, and blow away the lighter elements and leave the heavy stuff, so we are younger.

I may have to leave it an open question and sojourn on and keep collecting data for a few more lifetimes before getting back to you on this one !!! Cheers ! and pass that stellar cold one will you please ! Stella !

(in Egypt there is a beer called Stella, and at the wrap party for the film Ruby Cairo, or You Belong To Me, or Deception - it had 3 titles! during its lifetime of pre-to-post production ! ; Someone (who shall remain nameless) began to shout to the barkeeper to bring more bottles of Stella, in a Stanley _____ (that Marlo Brando role in Streetcar Named Desire) husky loud pleading voice,,, Stellaaaaaaa !

My understanding was that carbon and oxygen can form from helium fusion in a red giant, which largely accounts for their relative abundance. Lithium is lighter, but not the natural product of any of the lighter fusion events, and is rare for that reason. The novae and especially supernovae are needed to account adequately for the presence of significant amounts of heavier elements like nickel and iron.

Exactly, and even Hypernovae, which is what some think Eta Carnae will end up as. As far as the speed of dispersion, SN1987 will reveal in time. That data may still be impouded while the scientists studying the event have not made any announcements.

Ok Wolf, what is it that produces the heavy elements and scatters them around the galaxy ? Supernova maybe?

In reading your post again, Harry, I now understand you see ellipticals as the younger , and they then mature into spirals. This is understandable. I was seeing ellipticals as a more rare form and they lasted longer. Spirals being the easier to form, there are more, but ellipticals are more difficult to dismantle so they are older, some of them. M87 has been there so long it is attracting quite a crowd of admirers ! soon to eaten for lunch and dinner.
A globular cluster of globular clusters is its central region it looks like to me. Those aren't stars , they are globular clusters in pincushion orbits. If so, what a place to have the Seat of the Empire. It would always be blazing daylight for the bureaucrats to do their paperwork. The govt could save lots on the light bill.

Our Milky Way's galactic center radio arc and the new infrared photos are lending new understanding of what's in our closest backyard for study of a massive mass-structure. MHD as DNA in the ISM, one of my better posts from last year. It's on APOD somewhere. Well enough for now, taa./

you are making a hell of a mistake by stating/implying novae produce heavy elements. you are lucky to get lithium out of a nova explosion ( Prof Brownlee at the University of Washington ). Where there have been studied novae explosions, I have never read anything heavy was detected in the expanding shell.

my conceptual cosmology is different from the standard model,

In the begining there were large clouds of protons and electrons.

These slowly gathered into large galaxy size clumps.

Individual stars formed first, as the cloud continued to draw together and condense. Eventually an agreed upon center of mass developed, and a massive central domain ensued. It took quite a while for the central black hole to develop as the accretion mechanism was severely thwarted by resistive exponential curves of gravity energy radiative mechanisms as well as electron degeneracy pressures.

Once the central gravity well became massive enough it developed a magnetic structure surrounding it that reached almost to where the present day visible material perimeter exists. This weak magneto-hydro-dynamic (MHD) field had 2 maybe 4 lines of force. It helped to organize the very light protons and electrons and the spiral arms developed and condensed along these lines of magnetic force.

Through subsequent iterations of nova and condensation, populations of stars grew and their percentage of heavy elements increased as nova production and scattering of heavy elements enriched the galaxy.

The central galactic core has a wind that blows the light particles toward a halo area somewhere near the perimeter. It may actually be beyond the visible perimeter and form a hovering layer that is not particularly visible.

I have heard estimates that say the Milky Way makes 5 revolutions in a billion years. (after 50 years I see little difference ! , my jury is still out on that one.)

My feeling is things are much older than mainstream science thinks.

Nova production of heavy elements and spectroscopic analysis of starlight is mostly used for age determination, in my understanding. However I suspect there are much too many heavy elements in this planet Earth to account for the young age mainstream science allows for this section of the galaxy and universe. I have no maths to refute their estimates tho , alas.

If I was to generate an age for this galaxy I think I would start with the central mass, and how long could that form in, is there a minimum time necessary for its formation and it can't be younger than that.

Doing a statistical analysis for the region of our spiral arm neighborhood, how fast can novas make the area as dusty in heavy elements as we observe? Is there any way that heavy elements could be reduced over time so that a 2-3% showing is actually a result of a much longer environment? Can galaxies continue on and remain fairly similar looking? Like water going down a drain, the spiral arms remain consistent with the central gravity well's MHD dynamo production, like standing waves in the drain water. Can the central starlight radiative pressure (solar winds) keep pushing light elements towards the perimeter where they condense and form stars, which as they lose momentum by tidal action drift towards the central region. The heavier elements are drawn in and the lighter elements blown outward, making a merry-go-round recycling action within the galaxy, as it retains its general appearance longterm. This would allow the central gravity-well/black-hole to have an age of 50 billion years, while arm structure stars continue to have a 2-3% heavy element proportionality.

Only galactic mergers and acquisitions would be the serious affectors of galactic shapes. As well as near misses and pass-throughs.

I can imagine M87 to be 150 billion years old.

In light of the graph on page 9 today, it seems evident that nature abhors a black hole, and galactic central structures may take much longer to form than we presently theorize. (now can I find some data to support my conclusions ! that's the task at hand . LOL )

If I use a bunch of incorrect assumptions however derived, I will most likely not reach a correct age for our galaxy. That is the most difficult part of archeoastronomy, what formulas and hypothesis are actually correct. Every 500 years science throws out 90-95% of what it thought in the past to be correct ! Just ask Paul Fireabend. (scientific american had a dynamite interview with him, i saved it somewhere in my files out in the barn and it's -5C right now, so another day to dig that one out; from the 80's i think)

I now know how I will die; I will have typed so long APOD will have disconnected me and when I hit submit it will lose the entire posting and my heart will burst in fear of having to type it all over again !! LOL
It sure speeds up when I suddenly think, will it be successful during the pause after submit.
He died from a subscript domain typographical error.

Hello Kovil

You made me smile, not only because of your joke, but your ability to think and not to be held back by standard thinking.

You want some maths.

Calculate the age of the Milky Way.

How do you do that?

Start by assuming that there was an active so call balck hole that started to eject matter forming an elliptical galaxy than the black hole slowed down giving enough time for gravity from the composite galaxy and centre black hole to reform it into a spiral galaxy.

or start where ever you want.

Do not assume that the Big Bang theory is a start.

=======================================
Did you know that the word galaxy is Greek, meaning Milky Way

That is actually a very important paper Harry. As the gravity field density, forces the synchrotron radiation effect of the gravity field to bleed off, that is where the power for the central galaxy jets comes from !!!

Recycling gravity energy, in a highly directed ejection, which is opposite of the general attraction of gravity as a field.

I call it synchrotron radiation, because that is a good metaphor description using something we already understand as a template to mimic the actual effect in its morphology. As synchrotron radiation is highly scattered in direction, the gravity well radiation is highly focused in its departure.

Tomorrow will show if I should delete this post as it might be backasswards in its thinking. Just a wild idea at this point.

Harry , give me more maths to do , please, I need the work !
You be the conceptualist and I'll do the grunt work.

See Harry's first link, scroll down to 3rd PDF
"A hierarchy of cosmic compact objects - without black holes" ; pre print PDF
see the graphs on page 8 and 9;

Harry, 'black hole' is the first label that stuck with the media.
Maybe the 'black hole of Calcutta' was the connotative reference; thence from which no one ever returns, or returns the same.
Actually Nature abhors a black hole !!

'Gravity well' is cumbersome and 'singularity' spins funny, it's actually zero dimensions.

here we go; the graph on pg 9 shows how compact objects never cross the 50/50 line to get into blackhole territory of mass-to-size ratio.

So you are correct in that black holes never exist, and they are simply extreme compact objects trying to reach that unreachable ideal state. Black hole refers to the condition of light being soaked up and its being unseen, or unseeable. Black holes need a new name!

As the field density of the gravity field gets stronger, there is a synchrotron radiation effect that bleeds off the energy and that stops the field from becoming strong enough to squash into a singularity, ever; very much like the way mass increases to prevent baryonic matter from ever reaching the speed of light. It takes an infinite amount of energy to accelerate it further. It takes an infinite amount of matter to make the gravity field stronger, so it never makes singularity.

The construction of the universe is exceedingly well balanced. Opposing exponential curves limit the all powerful forces to never achieve their end purpose, and thusly the universe survives to live another day.

Maybe not intelligent design per se; Temperance is definitely involved,
14 in the Major Arcana. This is how God can make a stone so heavy He can't lift it ! and not be in violation of the rules of design !!! hahaha

who said there are finite particles in a mathematical solution ? A black hole is not a " case of beer ". Black hole is just a term coined to quickly announce a result to the scientific community without using the terminology " I don't know what the hell this thing is ", Call it a cow if you wish. It is almost analogous to a center of mass problem in a Statics class.

Hello ta152ho

it is a bloomin' singularity

What makes you think so?


I know you can get maths to show the singularity.

But! how do you get finite particals to go to an infinite point?