Chapter 19. Critical Comments

Comments to the model of a repulsive plasma body at the centre of galaxies.

The latest releases of data from Andrea Ghez’ group at the Keck observatory at Hawaii and from Reinhard Genzel’s group in Chile show data which are consistent with a black hole of about 4 million solar masses at the very centre of our galaxy. These facts simply blow the foundation for the repulsive plasma model away.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_M._Ghez#Black_Holes_at_the_Galactic_Center

If the S2 represents one star, and not by some mistake a combination of the orbits of 2 stars, then it is hard to dispute the existence of a compact, attractive mass at the centre. On this issue, one must be aware that S2 has been photographed 4 times per year in a rather crowded region with hectic activity, and the intermediate path has been computed with the expectancy of seeing an elliptical orbit. Only if there is any likelihood for mixing up different stars with much more atypical orbits, can the hypothesis of a repulsive plasma body at the galactic centre still hold true. Sad to say, in view of these recent publications, I cannot give my repulsive plasma model for galaxy formation a very high probability of being correct.

However, there are some recent discoveries that point in its favour as well, so I find it correct to keep it posted till the case is closed.

• A strong correlation between the Zigma-factor (based on the speed of the outer star in a galaxy) and the size of the black hole is exactly what we would expect if a black repulsive plasma body at the galactic centre would erupt matter to form a galaxy.    
• The high speed of outer stars is compatible with a repulsive force at the centre of the galaxy, (but it is also compatible with sources of repulsive dark energy in the bulge)  
• The observation of stars near the galactic centre is so difficult, that the two scientific groups cannot even agree on whether “most of these 100 young, massive stars seem to be concentrated within one (according to the UCLA group) or two (according to the MPE group) disks, rather than randomly distributed within the central parsec.”  
• No one has tried calculating the orbits of stars under the assumption of a repulsive force at the centre. (You don’t expect the Spanish inquisition - it is too far fetched.)  
• If the astronomers were denied the opportunity to assume fairly elliptical orbits, what data would they have been able to present then?  
• The abundance of very young stars born in one event would be what you expect when you have a recent eruption of matter from a plasma body. Also barred galaxies would make sense on this basis. The astronomers are still puzzled by the anomalous formation of more than 100 young stars in one event a few million years ago http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactic_Center  This would be very consistent with a model of a different kind of plasma erupting matter, as proposed at this website. Here is a quote from the link above:  

Quote:

Stellar population
The central parsec around Sagittarius A* contains thousands of stars. Although most of them are old red main sequence stars, the Galactic Center is also rich in massive stars. More than 100 OB and Wolf-Rayet stars have been identified there so far. They seem to have all been formed in a single star formation event a few million years ago. The existence of these relatively young (though evolved) stars was a surprise to experts, who expected the tidal forces from the central black-hole to prevent their formation. This paradox of youth is even more remarkable for stars that are on very tight orbits around Sagittarius A*, such as S2. The scenarios invoked to explain this formation involve either star formation in a massive star cluster offset from the Galactic Center that would have migrated to its current location once formed, or star formation within a massive, compact gas accretion disk around the central black-hole. It is interesting to note that most of these 100 young, massive stars seem to be concentrated within one (according to the UCLA group) or two (according to the MPE group) disks, rather than randomly distributed within the central parsec. This observation however does not allow definite conclusions to be drawn at this point.”

Unquote.

Comments to the general theory of the K particle.

“This theory is only a new version of the old and abandoned theory of the aether, which was proven wrong by Einstein and utterly discredited 100 years a ago.”

The aether was proven wrong by the Michelson-Morley Experiment long before anyone knew about elementary particles, far less having any idea that elementary particles probably don’t really consist of the mass they reveal as true proper mass. The Higgs particle has been postulated in order to give mass to elementary particles.

Unfortunately, the Higgs is very massive, and it is hard to see that it can serve as the aether. Therefore, the K particle is postulated as a mini-Higgs. To make it fit with existing laws of physics, we only need to postulate certain properties for the K particles, and for how it is absorbed, retained and emitted from elementary particles. This will in turn necessitate certain working mechanisms in elementary particles which have not been postulated previously. But thereafter, the energy-carrying K flux seems to surpass all the difficulties which discredited the classical massless aether. By correctly disproving the ether theory, scientists have been blindfolded for more than 100 years regarding the possibility of an aether-like medium compatible with modern physics.

“This theory is only general talk. Without a proper field theory, it cannot be taken seriously, since it is impossible to calculate whether it is Lorentz invariant, whether it is compatible with the special and general theory of relativity, or whether it matches the empirical facts of quantum mechanics and the standard model."

Evidently, some physicists feel that way about it, and it is true that without further development, it won’t convince a sceptical reviewer - and it is not meant to convince anyone - it is meant to awaken physicists and turn their attention to new possibilities. At present, several physicists and professors and doctors in theoretical physics are working on these issues. This is a major undertaking, so it will take some time. If successful, it may lead to smaller or larger modifications of the theory as well.

Do you have any comments? Click HERE

You are currently on page: Critical Comments

Previous page: Falsifiable Predictions  Next page: The Michelson-Morley experiment