You are right. He says that in the pictures it looks like a galaxy is budding a quasar. If he is right then all of our physics are wrong. Why should we reject the simpler explanation that it is two galaxies in collision? If there is a good simple explanation why pick an extreme explanation that has no theoretical backing.
The electrical force is exponentially more powerful than the gravitational force. The plasma folks make a reasonable case that many of the observations we see can be better explained using the plasma (electrical) model.
The primary problem with the Theory of Gravity is that the spiral arms of galaxies are rotating too quickly. The plasma guys may actually be right. I think that it will be combination of Gravity and electricity. The great breakthrough of the 1800's was Maxwell's Equations that combined Electricity, Magnetism, and Light. They are all the same thing.
So now we have 4 forces, Strong, Weak, Electrical and Gravity. Einsteins dream was to unite them and give us the GUT (grand unified theory). We are missing something and we don't know what it is : ) That is why they invented the mythical dark energy and dark matter. They are just a constant that they can throw into their equations to make them consistent with the observations of the Universe. Much like Einsteins famous mistake.
All of the history of Physics is pointing to a GUT. That means that the Plasma boys probably have part of the picture right and the Gravity boys have part of the picture right. Both are missing something. That something is probably going to come from the strong and weak forces. Someone is going to see the connection between the small and large forces and then the rest of us will say aha it is obvious : )
I will have to disagree with you here. I’m a grand unified theory kind of thinker. It remains the holy grail of physics and it is nowhere in sight yet but I do think that one day we will have a theory in place that ties it all together. Cheers.
Maxwell's Equations unified what were thought to be 3 separate things is the guide for the GUT. The GUT won't disprove them, it will explain the relationships. Just like Einstein didn't disprove F=MA he just refined it. That is what is going to happen. I think we just don't have enough pieces of the puzzle yet. Or the right question : )
He says that in the pictures it looks like a galaxy is budding a quasar. If he is right then all of our physics are wrong.
I disagree with you here. Most of the physics we use in our daily life are based on Newton’s work. None of that work comes into question. In fact, anything that has been proved to be true is safe. The only thing Arps investigation calls into question is the big bang view of the universe. That hypothesis was based on Einstein’s theory that made gravity king. The plasma crowd thinks that the much stronger electrical force needs to be given more consideration.
Why should we reject the simpler explanation that it is two galaxies in collision?
I see no reason why the ejection model precludes galaxies from colliding. In fact we should expect to see this happening when two proto galaxies are ejected from separate locations with vectors that put them on a collision course.
If there is a good simple explanation why pick an extreme explanation that has no theoretical backing.
I would agree with you if we stipulate that the theory in question is backed by observational data. When they don’t agree, is it the theory that’s flawed or is the observational data incorrect? The theorist can imagine something that brings order to the situation but when his invention is unobservable it becomes an exercise in faith. Modern Cosmologists accept without question that black holes exist. The observable universe would be unexplainable without them. Never mind if somebody else can show you how the electrical force can act as the galactic engine. That goes against the dogma that the main stream scientists hang onto.
My quest during the last year has been sobering. I knew that science sometimes goes down dead end paths but I always believed that the sciences were pure enough to correct their course when things went wrong. History, on the other hand, shows us that paradigm shifts don’t come easily and it appears to me that we are in the throws of just that kind of shift. Arp, Peratt, and others who share similar views are ignored, marginalized, and ridiculed. Their observations and ideas are not challenged as much as they are discarded out of hand. Don’t bother me with observations that question my science (religion). Some research I did yesterday backs up this conclusion. I’ll share it with you when I’ve had more time to flesh it out.
I think that it will be combination of Gravity and electricity.
I agree with this statement and so does Anthony Peratt.
“With apparent inevitability, an increasing number of electrical engineers have extended their plasma interests beyond Earth, into such realms as interplanetary "space weather" and plasma laboratory astrophysics. Their fundamental view on cosmology is that electromagnetic forces sculpt the broad outlines of the universe; gravitational forces shape the details only after electromagnetic forces have first drawn the diffuse matter close enough together for gravity to become significant.”
That is why they invented the mythical dark energy and dark matter. They are just a constant that they can throw into their equations to make them consistent with the observations of the Universe. Much like Einstein’s famous mistake.
I agree that these constructs are place holders that keep things together until they come up with something that explains the true picture. My problem is that by refusing to acknowledge contrary evidence they are spinning their wheels and wasting the tax payers money. As for Albert’s famous mistake, it was the expansion of the universe that caused him to recognize his error. That expansion was “proved” by using redshift as a measure of recessional velocity. Albert was probably correct in abandoning his constant, but the mechanism as to how the universe is expanding may be totally different than what he was led to believe.
This whole episode points to one of the main problems we face today. Einstein was brilliant and his insights brought about a paradigm shift. He was a mathematician. He had an idea in his mind as to how the universe worked and his formulas weren’t working as he expected so he threw in his cosmological constant to mold his formulas to the way he envisioned the cosmos to work. It is somewhat sleight of hand. It looks good on paper but what about reality. I think that Einstein was a great theorist and his work has led the way in moving research along some very productive paths. He was not infallible though and when observation or a better theory leads us away from his work then we need to have the courage to move forward. It is important for us to never forget that Einstein himself was not satisfied with his work.
All of the history of Physics is pointing to a GUT. That means that the Plasma boys probably have part of the picture right and the Gravity boys have part of the picture right. Both are missing something. That something is probably going to come from the strong and weak forces. Someone is going to see the connection between the small and large forces and then the rest of us will say aha it is obvious : )
I agree with you here although it may not be obvious. I have more to share with you if you’d like. It has been good for me to bounce these things off of someone else.
Why should we reject the simpler explanation that it is two galaxies in collision?
I see no reason why the ejection model precludes galaxies from colliding. In fact we should expect to see this happening when two proto galaxies are ejected from separate locations with vectors that put them on a collision course. No dark matter required. In fact if you look at Dr. Peratt’s simulation it appears that this sort of collision (or near collision) between two budding galaxies is what leads to the ubiquitous spiral form that we see so predominantly in the universe today.