Skip to comments.Astronomy Picture of the Day -- Plasma Jets from Radio Galaxy Hercules A
Posted on 12/05/2012 9:30:09 PM PST by SunkenCiv
Explanation: Why does this galaxy emit such spectacular jets? No one is sure, but it is likely related to an active supermassive black hole at its center. The galaxy at the image center, Hercules A, appears to be a relatively normal elliptical galaxy in visible light. When imaged in radio waves, however, tremendous plasma jets over one million light years long appear. Detailed analyses indicate that the central galaxy, also known as 3C 348, is actually over 1,000 times more massive than our Milky Way Galaxy, and the central black hole is nearly 1,000 times more massive than the black hole at our Milky Way's center. Pictured above is a visible light image obtained by the Earth-orbiting Hubble Space Telescope superposed with a radio image taken by the recently upgraded Very Large Array (VLA) of radio telescopes in New Mexico, USA. The physics that creates the jets remains a topic of research with a likely energy source being infalling matter swirling toward the central black hole.
(Excerpt) Read more at 188.8.131.52 ...
[Credit: NASA, ESA, S. Baum & C. O'Dea (RIT), R. Perley and W. Cotton (NRAO/AUI/NSF), and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)]
Whoops, sorry, this is the correct thumbnail, or rather faux-nail.
Thanks rawcatslyentist for this interesting link, In the Loop: The Sounds of Space: New Chorus Recording By RBSPs EMFISIS Instrument.
“The physics that creates the jets remains a topic of research with a likely energy source being infalling matter swirling toward the central black hole.”
Yes, it’s one of those “issues” they have yet to resolve to get a purely gravity-based cosmological model to match up with observed phenomena. Here’s an alternative hypothesis:
The galaxy itself is a spinning disc of plasma, and any such moving mass of plasma will create a magnetic field. The magnetic field lines will run perpendicular to the direction of current flow, and in a spinning disc arrangement, the field produced should be a toroid, with the donut hole of the toroid located at the galactic center. In such an arrangement, the surrounding toroid field will exert a containment effect on the plasma, but this containment effect is going to be weakest in the area of the donut hole, making the superposition of spinning disc and toroid magnetic field an inherently “leaky” containment system.
The fact that the galactic center is also the densest part, and may also contain black holes, certainly should be a contributing factor to any plasma being ejected from the system, however to ignore the obvious electromagnetic effects which are pertinent is just foolish.
Thank you for sharing your theory. I always thought that magnetic fields were under rated. They should be considered to explain the shape of bar spiral galaxies. I suggested same to my astronomy professor back in 1979 and he poo-pooed the idea.
That is pretty, but it also looks like mass destruction of the galaxy as it spins into the energy being ejected.
Your observation that the shape of galaxies can be explained by plasma dynamics is correct, and not only for spiral bars, but for every observed regular configuration of galaxies. As an example, here is a "top down" view of two interacting Birkeland currents (currents traveling on plasma filaments), showing how the dynamics of their interaction can form a galactic shape:
What’s ejected is not energy per se, but plasma, which is a gaseous conductor of energy. Plasma is charged, and the galaxy has a magnetic field, so if the galaxy collided with the ejected plasma, the magnetic field would protect it, just like Earth’s magnetic field protects us from the plasma that the sun ejects towards us (the solar wind).
Thank you! So no mass destruction. I appreciate the information. Sixty-six, and I’m still in need of education, LOL!
I dabble in Astronomy like I do in everything else, such as History, Geology and Law, (and I make my money from Law) but I really only know enough to be a danger to myself and others.
But even back in 1979, it just seemed to me a logical explanation. The professor said that a magnetic field could not be strong enough to define the location of massive objects like stars. My point was that the field didn’t have to be that strong, only strong enough to “herd” the interstellar gas and dust into “clouds” that conformed to the magnetic field. The stars then formed where the gas was.
He still rejected the idea. I did get top grade in his class, though. And it was thoroughly enjoyable otherwise. In the first week, when the ditzy sorority girl asked if there were any stars between the earth and the moon, I knew I was in good shape.
I like this thread because I like seeing the posts of people like you who follow astronomy a lot more than my scattered time resources allow.
“My point was that the field didnt have to be that strong, only strong enough to herd the interstellar gas and dust into clouds that conformed to the magnetic field. The stars then formed where the gas was.”
Yes, and also, the electromagnetic effects and gravitational effects don’t have to be exclusive causes. They’re complimentary phenomena, so their effects can combine together and both be responsible, in part, for our observations.
Also, plasma can exhibit self-organizing behavior, when it is arranged in such a way to create recursive feedback. That’s not exclusive to plasma, but is common to all sorts of things that can be so arranged. The principle of induction means that an ionized plasma exposed to a moving magnetic field will result in a current induced in the plasma. When an electrical current is induced, that itself creates a magnetic field surrounding the plasma, which can interact with both the inducing magnetic field and the charged plasma itself, and so on, and so forth, ad infinitum. This type of recursion, mathematically, is always present any time you see fractal shapes appearing, like we see in the galaxies. It’s the key to non-conscious matter and energy arranging itself into optimal patterns.
So, if a cloud of weakly ionized gas passes by a star, galaxy, cluster or any body with a magnetic field, it is like knocking over a domino. It can start a chain reaction of electromagnetic interactions which can result in the plasma changing from a disordered cloud, moving unguided in one direction, to an oscillating magnetically contained body that is subject to a whole variety of subtle, harmonically arranged, electromagnetic interactions.
One of those interactions, the “pinch” phenomenon, can itself compress matter, even to the point of fusion, without the need for gravitational compression. So, starting a simple domino effect caused by induction, a gas cloud could conceivably begin taking the shape of a galaxy and kickstart the process of star formation. That’s not to say that all the gravitational interactions that could cause star formation and self-organization wouldn’t also be happening, just that the two could be working together in tandem.
If you look at the photo, it could appear that the plasma jets are pouring out in a convex angle, with the galaxy in the forefront and the plasma jets bending away from us, rather that 180 degrees on each side of the galaxy.
Many of these things I did not know, but they all make sense. Thank you. If there is a problem with astronomy, it is that the theories are not easily subject to laboratory replication because the scale of size and time is too great, and we don’t have all the data to put into any given theory. For example, we don’t really know if the center of Hercules A is one massive black hole, or several black holes.
Scientists will try to come up with various means of trying to “fit” new data that becomes available into their existing favorite theory. To me, the prime example is “dark matter” and “dark energy.” I have a strong suspicion that those theories are being propounded to explain away inconvenient observations that are actually proving that some generally accepted theories of underlying universal constants are simply wrong.
“If there is a problem with astronomy, it is that the theories are not easily subject to laboratory replication because the scale of size and time is too great, and we dont have all the data to put into any given theory.”
Yes, very much so. Gravity isn’t a readily scalable phenomenon, so we can’t make a “mini-galaxy” in the lab to observe the gravitational effects. Electromagnetism is scalable, so we can observe stuff like that Birkeland current animation I posted, in the laboratory, and the behavior should be the same if the plasma filaments were of cosmic size and much greater charge levels. We’d just have to account for the different gravitational effects that we can’t reproduce in the lab.
“I have a strong suspicion that those theories are being propounded to explain away inconvenient observations that are actually proving that some generally accepted theories of underlying universal constants are simply wrong.”
The dark matter and dark energy are necessary because the observations don’t match the predictions of a gravity-only model, but the scientists obstinately refuse to consider that any other force might be in play. One example is the rotation of galaxies. The outer arms should be rotating more slowly than the inner core, but instead they keep pace and the shape of the galaxy doesn’t get distorted. It’s obvious that something is accelerating the outer portion besides the gravity from the visible matter. So, scientists invent “invisible matter”, so they can keep gravity as the accelerator, instead of looking at another force as the missing accelerator. It’s willful blindness on their part, at this point.
Your astronomy professor who poo-poohed the idea doesn't understand physics and was totally unaware that electromagnetic phenomena, while being just as infinite in reach as gravity, are 39 orders of magnitude (1039 or 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 STRONGER than gravity.
What even these modern orthodox gravity cosmologists don't even attempt to try to explain is how gravity can explain the twisted thread of plasma extending over one million light years away from the gravity source and still remain tightly coherently, twisted and contained! The twisting they explain by using a water sprinkler analogy... but ignore inertia of a body in motion tending to stay in motion in the vector it has received by the impetus it was given. They have NO explanation beyond that as to what keeps these double helix formations together. Electric Universe Cosmologists not only can explain them, they can REPRODUCE them in the microcosm in the laboratory in plasmas with electromagnetic forces and in computers using electromagnetic formulae. Even every shape of every galaxy can be derived from those formulae without resorting to the Orthodox Cosmologists' waving of hands and invocations of the magic of dark matter, dark energy, and their magic Neutron stars and black holes to get their theories to work.
The ONLY thing that could do that would be a large current of electric energy flowing through the plasma, sustaining a huge rotating magnetic field, containing plasma. Trillions of volts flowing through threads of plasma conduits through an anything but empty universe. An electric universe in which stars are anodes, Enormous power transistors, along currents fed by those energy conduits, and not nuclear engines driven by gravitic fusion.
This alone explains why the surface our star is only 5000 K while the upper atmosphere is in the 5,000,000 K, something that CANNOT be explained by any form of "convection" as the current orthodox solar and gravitic cosmologist try to explain it, but which electric cosmologist can easily explain and demonstrate using electronic gate technology.
It is amazing to watch as article after article is released from the astronomy and cosmology community that starts with something like "Astronomers and Cosmologists were (surprised, astounded, shocked - choose one) to find. . .), when what they found was something that was predicted, expected, and already being looked for by the proponents of the Electric Universe Theories of Harlan Arp, Walt Thronhill, and Nobel Prize winning cosmologist Hannes Alfven
Check out Thunderbolts.info for lots more scientific and scholarly info on the Electric Universe. I have pinged the Electric Universe ping list as well to this thread.
Please add me to the Electric Universe ping list please!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.