Reflections on NGC 6188 (APOD 01Jun06)
- orin stepanek
- Plutopian
- Posts: 8200
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
- Location: Nebraska
Reflections on NGC 6188 (APOD 01Jun06)
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap060601.html
NGC 6188 is very rich in gas and dust as is the Milky way as a whole and most spiral galaxies. Has anyone wondered where all this gas and dust came from? Was it here since the beginning of time; or is there something or force that is creating gas and dust all along? Elliptical galaxies seem to have an absence of gas and dust. Have these galaxies used up all there star forming material?
Orin
NGC 6188 is very rich in gas and dust as is the Milky way as a whole and most spiral galaxies. Has anyone wondered where all this gas and dust came from? Was it here since the beginning of time; or is there something or force that is creating gas and dust all along? Elliptical galaxies seem to have an absence of gas and dust. Have these galaxies used up all there star forming material?
Orin
-
- G'day G'day G'day G'day
- Posts: 2881
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
Hello All
Where did it all come from?
It has always being here in some form of matter or other.
Since majic is out of the question.
We observe the parts of the universe and how they recycle.
Star formation
Black Hole evolution.
Stars and galaxies colliding and so on.
Where did it all come from?
It has always being here in some form of matter or other.
Since majic is out of the question.
We observe the parts of the universe and how they recycle.
Star formation
Black Hole evolution.
Stars and galaxies colliding and so on.
Harry : Smile and live another day.
- orin stepanek
- Plutopian
- Posts: 8200
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
- Location: Nebraska
- orin stepanek
- Plutopian
- Posts: 8200
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:41 pm
- Location: Nebraska
-
- G'day G'day G'day G'day
- Posts: 2881
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
Hello Orin
What is the evidence against the Big Bang?
http://www.bigbangneverhappened.org/p27.htm
Hydrogen formation,,,,,,,,,,this is just one process.
We may have to look at first the process involved in a supernova.
http://observe.arc.nasa.gov/nasa/space/ ... th_3a.html
Lets look at our sun as an example.
http://web.umr.edu/~om/report_to_fcr/report_to_fcr1.htm
see
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest2.html
What is the evidence against the Big Bang?
http://www.bigbangneverhappened.org/p27.htm
Hydrogen formation,,,,,,,,,,this is just one process.
We may have to look at first the process involved in a supernova.
http://observe.arc.nasa.gov/nasa/space/ ... th_3a.html
http://observe.arc.nasa.gov/nasa/space/ ... acont.htmlAs the mass of the star's iron core approaches 1.4 solar masses (due to continued silicon and sulfur burning in a thin shell adjacent to the iron core), a dramatic sequence of events is being triggered:
Iron Core Collapse
Gravity, which up to now was balanced by the outward force of the pressure, decisively gains the upper hand and the iron core collapses.
In less than a second, the core collapses from a size of about 5,000 miles to one of about a dozen miles, and an enormous amount of energy is released. This collapse happens so fast that the star's outer layers have no time to react and participate in it.
The amount of energy that is released during core collapse is truly gigantic -- it is equivalent to the energy produced by 100 stars like the Sun during their entire lifetimes of more than 10 billion years!
Most of the energy released during the collapse of the iron core is carried off into space by elusive particles called neutrinos. A small fraction of the energy is deposited in the lower layers of the envelope surrounding the core and triggers the supernova explosion.
The energy deposited in the lower layers of the envelope creates a superstrong shock wave that runs outward through the envelope toward the star's surface.
As the shock wave runs outward, it heats the envelope, induces explosive nuclear burning, and ejects the envelope at speeds of thousands of miles per second (i.e., in excess of 10 million miles/hour).
It is during this phase that elements heavier than iron are being manufactured.
When the shock wave reaches the star's surface, it very quickly heats the surface layers and brightens them. Within a day or two the exploding star becomes brighter than a billion Suns.
The result of these events is a compact stellar remnant and a rapidly expanding gaseous shell.
The stellar remnant is a neutron star or a black hole.
The expanding gaseous shell plows into the surrounding interstellar medium, and pushes, compresses, and intermingles with it. Such regions of the interstellar medium are known as supernova remnants.
Lets look at our sun as an example.
http://web.umr.edu/~om/report_to_fcr/report_to_fcr1.htm
The Sun and its planetary system formed from heterogeneous debris1-11 of a supernova (SN) that exploded 5 billion years ago12,13. Meteorites and planets recorded this as decay products of short-lived nuclides and linked variations in elemental and isotopic abundances. Cores of the inner planets grew in the central iron-rich region of the SN debris, and the Sun formed on the collapsed SN core. See Figs. 1-5.
The Sun’s radiant energy and protons in the solar wind (SW) come from the collapsed supernova core, a neutron star (NS), on which the Sun formed. The cradle (Figs. 9-12) indicates that the energy of each neutron in the Sun’s central NS exceeds that of a free neutron by @ 10-22 MeV (Figs. 13-15) Solar luminosity and the flux of solar-wind protons are generated by a series of reactions (Fig. 16): a) escape of neutrons from the central NS, b) decay of free neutrons or their capture by other nuclides, c) fusion and upward migration of H+ through material that accreted on the NS, and d) escape of H+ in the SW. An example might be:
a) The escape of neutrons from the NS, <1n> –> 1n + 10-22 MeV
b) The decay of free neutrons, 1n –> 1H+ + e- + nanti + 0.78 MeV
c) Fusion of hydrogen, 4 1H+ + 2 e- –> 4He++ + 2 n + 26.73 MeV
d) Some H+ reaches the surface and departs in the solar wind
We can always workout how hydrogen was formed and if the Big Bang did occur the hydrogen production would be on similar lines.Reactions like a) and b) produce part of the Sun’s radiant energy and perhaps the luminosity of isolated neutron stars25. Note that reaction a) alone may release more energy per nucleon than is released by the sum of reactions b) and c), the decay or capture of neutrons plus H-fusion. The well-established Solar Neutrino Puzzle26 confirms that reaction c) generates only part of the Sun’s total luminosity. Most 1H+ from b) is consumed by H-fusion, but the anomalous abundance of H (See Fig. 8) shows that 1H+ also leaks from the interior, selectively carrying lighter nuclides to the solar surface (See Fig. 6) before departing in the solar wind at an emission rate of about 2.7 x 1043 1H/yr. Homochirality in living creatures26 was likely initiated by circularly polarized light (CPL) from the Sun’s early NS. Their fate and climate changes of planets27 may depend on the half-life of this massive nucleus at the Sun’s core.
see
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest2.html
Harry : Smile and live another day.
-
- G'day G'day G'day G'day
- Posts: 2881
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 8:04 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
hello orin
A few weeks ago I posted this from a News paper
News flash. Sydney Morning Herald.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"London: The universe we live in may not be the only one but just the latest in a line of repeating big bangs stretching back through time, according to the latest theory from cosmologists.
Instead of being formed from a single big bang about 14 billion years ago destined to expand and eventually peter out to the cold, dead remains of stars, the universe may be an endless loop of explosions and contractions stretching forever.
The latest theory has been postulated to account for what Einstein described as his biggest Blunder"", the cosmological constant, a number linking energy and space, which he proposed to account for the galaxies being driven apart."
Physcists have since than measured the number as too small.
The constant is a mathematical representaion of the nergy of empty space, known as dark energy, which exerts a kind of anti-gravity, pushing galaxies apart at an accelerating rate. It hapens to be a googol(1 followed by 100 zeros) times smaller than would be expected if the universe was created in a single big bang.
According to the new theory, published yesterday in the journal Science, the discrepancy can be explained if the universe itself is billions of years older and fashioned from cyclical big bangs.
people have infered that time began then, but there really wasn't a reason for that infrernce, said Neil Turok, a theoretical physcist at Cambridge University in Britain. " what we are proposing is very radical. Its saying there was time before the Big Bang".
There doesn't have to be a beginning of time, Professor Turok said. According to our theory, the universe may be infinitely old and infinetly large".
If this theory is right, how long have we got until the next big bang?
Professor Turok said " We can't predict when it will happen with any precision- all we can say is it won't be within the next 10 billion years".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question where did it come from is this.
The universe is recyclic. All the matter was here before and will be here for ever and ever.
A few weeks ago I posted this from a News paper
News flash. Sydney Morning Herald.
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"London: The universe we live in may not be the only one but just the latest in a line of repeating big bangs stretching back through time, according to the latest theory from cosmologists.
Instead of being formed from a single big bang about 14 billion years ago destined to expand and eventually peter out to the cold, dead remains of stars, the universe may be an endless loop of explosions and contractions stretching forever.
The latest theory has been postulated to account for what Einstein described as his biggest Blunder"", the cosmological constant, a number linking energy and space, which he proposed to account for the galaxies being driven apart."
Physcists have since than measured the number as too small.
The constant is a mathematical representaion of the nergy of empty space, known as dark energy, which exerts a kind of anti-gravity, pushing galaxies apart at an accelerating rate. It hapens to be a googol(1 followed by 100 zeros) times smaller than would be expected if the universe was created in a single big bang.
According to the new theory, published yesterday in the journal Science, the discrepancy can be explained if the universe itself is billions of years older and fashioned from cyclical big bangs.
people have infered that time began then, but there really wasn't a reason for that infrernce, said Neil Turok, a theoretical physcist at Cambridge University in Britain. " what we are proposing is very radical. Its saying there was time before the Big Bang".
There doesn't have to be a beginning of time, Professor Turok said. According to our theory, the universe may be infinitely old and infinetly large".
If this theory is right, how long have we got until the next big bang?
Professor Turok said " We can't predict when it will happen with any precision- all we can say is it won't be within the next 10 billion years".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question where did it come from is this.
The universe is recyclic. All the matter was here before and will be here for ever and ever.
Harry : Smile and live another day.