Accretion Disc Same as a Spiral Galaxy??????

Just ran onto this little paper on BH accretion. It's a strong corrolary
to the MHD/ reverse-EMF "shear" mechanism suggested earlier. The
accelerating inflows _have to be_ electric plasmas by dint of
superheating. As such, they must generate enormous magnetic structures
powering the MHD mechanism which drives the jets -

http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/cfa/tad/e...tracts/35.html

oc

Thanks oc I'm looking for gravity creating an EM force in accretion
disks to show gravity creates the electromagnetic force in the
microscopic realm. This is what Einstien was trying to achieve. We have
to remember he did not like blackholes,and that is why he missed the
boat. He spent his last 35 years,and did not realize he needed a strong
gravity forge in the micro realm to align particles to have a N and S
poles,and keep the alignment. It is parrel lines of force that make a
force greater. My theory is really starting to gel together. Bert

Bert wrote,

I'm looking for gravity creating an EM
force in accretion disks to show gravity
creates the electromagnetic force in the
microscopic realm. This is what Einstien
was trying to achieve. We have to
remember he did not like blackholes,and
that is why he missed the boat. He spent his last 35 years,and did not
realize he
needed a strong gravity force in the
micro realm to align particles to have a
N and S poles, and keep the alignment.
It is parallel lines of force that make a
force greater. My theory is really starting to gel together. =A0 =A0

Bert, all field theories are founded on the premise that space is
functionally void or 'nothing'. That's why they've been unable to unify
gravity and the strong force, and resort to complex mathematical
constructs involving "eleven dimensions" and such. But if gravity is
simply recognized for exactly _what it appears to be and behaves as_ ,
namely the flow of the spatial medium itself, unification becomes
glaringly obvoius and requires no math whatsoever to convey in concept.
When there's a spin component to the flow, the natural
bipolarity of black holes' gravity and the proton's strong force becomes
obvious, with clear-cut 'N' and 'S' polarities. That, in a nutshell, is
the unification of gravity in the macro realm with magnetism and the
strong force in the micro realm (under Wolter's CBB model, that is).
That covers three of his Four Forces. The one remaining, electric flow,
shows how the 90-degree relationship of electric flow in a conductor to
the proton's N-S strong force is the basis of electromagnetism. But
that's another chapter.

oc

'Lo ya'll --

Bill, what you describe as the bipolar input to a black hole also makes
me think of a nebula as it collapses to form a star and stellar system...

It occurs to me that the collapsing cloud of gas and dust would leave
behind huge amounts of scattered bits of matter and gas that would
stretch out in all directions from the collapsing nebula.

As the nebula collapses, it is believed to spin faster and faster. When
the spin is fast enough (at some point *before* the collapsed nebula
becomes a fusor, a star) an accretion disk forms at the equator. Within
this accretion disk the dust begins to come together to form larger and
larger discreet planets.

Now, what about all that other matter that stretches out in all directions
as well as the directions off the equator? The two possibilities seem to
be (1) that it remains there for awhile with nothing to motivate it to
come together to form anything, and then eventually, when the cloud
fuses to become a star, it's blown away by the brand new stellar wind.

and (2) perhaps this material is swallowed back into the quick-spinning
nebula at the poles, drawn by the tremendous gravity of the newly
formed (but not yet fused) spinning protostar? This second possibility
would solve a problem i've been having with the amount of mass that it
takes to make several huge planets at various distances from a forming
star. I've never been able to picture the matter in an accretion disk to
be enough to form all those planets.

Yet... if matter from directions *other than* the accretion disk is sucked
in at the poles of the spinning nebula, while matter continues to leave the
nebula via the accretion disk, this might be enough mass to justify all the
planets and other objects we have circling our Sun today?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
We move very very slow...
Galaxies very fast...
Soon it will be Time to Know--
To do the Fancy Math!

T = kt

Painius

"Constant? CONSTANT? WE don't need no stinking CONSTANT!"
Tommy Chong (of Cheech and Chong)

Painius wrote,

...and (2) perhaps this material is swallowed back into the
quick-spinning nebula at the poles, drawn by the tremendous gravity of
the newly formed (but not yet fused) spinning protostar?

Nein!! Nyet!! Nix!! No, Paine. Bipolar accretion would apply _only_ to
black holes, not to 'normal' stellar bodies, protostars etc. The inbound
material from the accretion disk falls _onto_ the star pretty much as
the mainstream model depicts. Up to and including neutron stars, the
infall goes 'onto' the star. 'Normal' objects having very high spin
rates, such as the recently-discussed millisecond pulsar, would show the
barest beginnings of gravitic bipolarity and the infall's beginning to
favor the poles. The spin rate of BHs would be orders of magnitude
higher, making them into full-fledged gravitic dipoles. The BH core of a
Seyfert galaxy would be a good illustration of gravitic bipolarity.

oc

Painius, just to expound a bit more on gravitic bipolarity and how it's
rooted in the simplest of grade-school physics.. the Earth itself, due
to its rotation, gravitates _slightly_ less strongly at its equator than
at the poles. The difference is slight but measurable. The linear
velocity at the equator is a tad over 1000 mph.
Now ('thought experiment') picture the entire mass of
the Earth collapsed to a pea-sized BH. Due to conservation of angular
momentum, the equatorial velocity is now vectored onto the radius of a
pea. What happens to the spin-rate? It goes astronomically high. With
the equator now violently repellant to entry, by what route can the BH
possibly gravitate (and accrete matter) except thru its poles?

oc

Well, it was just a thought... g

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Eclipse! Eclipse! Oh red and tawny
Moon's mysterious glows,
Watch! soon our Moon again embrace
Earthshadow's ruddy flows.

'Tis Mars who sometimes ventures close
and sparks a bloody war
to end all wars and bring us peace,
that we may kill no more.

Paine Ellsworth

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message...
...

Painius, just to expound a bit more on gravitic bipolarity and how it's
rooted in the simplest of grade-school physics.. the Earth itself, due
to its rotation, gravitates _slightly_ less strongly at its equator than
at the poles. The difference is slight but measurable. The linear
velocity at the equator is a tad over 1000 mph.
Now ('thought experiment') picture the entire mass of
the Earth collapsed to a pea-sized BH. Due to conservation of angular
momentum, the equatorial velocity is now vectored onto the radius of a
pea. What happens to the spin-rate? It goes astronomically high. With
the equator now violently repellant to entry, by what route can the BH
possibly gravitate (and accrete matter) except thru its poles?

oc